ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2026
Characterizing the Uncertainty, Misclassification and Inconsistency of Polygenic Prediction.
Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Polygenic risk scores (PRSs) hold promise for precision medicine, yet their clinical translation is hindered by substantial uncertainty in individual risk estimates and often limited agreement in risk stratification across multiple PRSs for the same disease. We develop a unified inferential framework to calibrate PRS point estimates and uncertainties for both quantitative traits and binary phenotypes, and to characterize how PRS accuracy, uncertainty, pairwise correlation jointly determine misclassification and classification inconsistency. We show, both theoretically and empirically, that individual- and population-level misclassification and inconsistency rates are highly predictable in independent datasets. We further evaluate PRS integration and uncertainty-aware probabilistic thresholding strategies that reduce misclassification and improve concordance in risk stratification. Together, these results demonstrate that instability in PRS-based classification is a predictable statistical consequence of uncertainty and establish a principled foundation for incorporating uncertainty into PRS-based risk interpretation, communication, and clinical decision-making.
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.