ArticleNature communications2026
Evaluating confounding in rare variant genome wide association studies.
Article in Nature communications, 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The theorised risk that confounded rare variant associations will emerge from population based genetic studies has not been investigated empirically. Here, we use 306,991 sequenced exomes from the UK Biobank to demonstrate that recent demography is poorly captured by common and rare variant principal components, and accounting for haplotype sharing does not eliminate false-positive rare variant associations with non-heritable spatially structured traits. Through re-analysis of 155 phenotypes in siblings, we show a trend of higher effect estimates bias for non-uniformly distributed traits, suggesting population stratification is most pervasive in these settings. Despite its spatial structure, bias of rare variant associations with height appeared most strongly influenced by assortative mating. We explore the risk of elevated false discovery rates for recent variants private to extended families sharing polygenic liability to extreme phenotypes, as well as through local linkage with common causal variants. Overall, we consider the complex confounding mechanisms that can impact rare variant studies and demonstrate family-based approaches can enable important sensitivity analyses.
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.