ArticleInternational journal of population data science2026
Genetic risk score informed re-evaluation of phenotype quality control to maximise power in epidemiological studies: application to lung function.
Article in International journal of population data science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Clinical guidelines may reduce statistical power in epidemiological studies by discarding informative measures. Epidemiological studies of lung function may discard one-third to one-half of participants due to spirometry measures deemed "low quality" using criteria adapted from clinical practice. Objectives: To optimise the signal-to-noise ratio in epidemiological studies of lung function, we aimed to develop a data-driven method to refine spirometry quality control (QC) criteria. Methods: We proposed a genetic risk score (GRS) informed strategy to categorise spirometer blows by quality criteria. GRS was built using SNPs associated with lung function traits in non-UK Biobank cohorts. In the UK Biobank, we applied a step-wise testing of the GRS association across groups of spirometry blows stratified by acceptability flags to rank the blow quality. We reassessed QC criteria by comparing the genetic associations under different acceptability flags and repeatability thresholds to determine the trade-off between sample size and measurement error. Results: We found that including blows previously excluded by strict QC criteria would maximise the statistical power for genome-wide association study and retain acceptable precision in the UK Biobank. This approach allowed the inclusion of 29% more participants compared to the strictest clinical guidelines and demonstrated genetic signals could be identified earlier. Conclusions: Our GRS-based method offers an important framework to challenge prevailing practices that exclude informative measures and limit power in epidemiological studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.