Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25997848›Full record

ArticleBMC genomics2015

Assessing models for genetic prediction of complex traits: a comparison of visualization and quantitative methods.

Sarah A Gagliano, Andrew D Paterson, Michael E Weale, Jo Knight

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC genomics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Sarah A GaglianoCampbell Family Mental Health Research Institute, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. sarah.gagliano@camh.ca.
Andrew D PatersonInstitute of Medical Science, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. andrew.paterson@utoronto.ca.
Michael E WealeDepartment of Medical & Molecular Genetics, King's College London, Guy's Hospital, London, UK. michael.weale@kcl.ac.uk.
Jo KnightCampbell Family Mental Health Research Institute, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. jo.knight@camh.ca.

Funding

Canadian Institutes of Health Research
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn silico models have recently been created in order to predict which genetic variants are more likely to contribute to the risk of a complex trait given their functional characteristics. However, there has been no comprehensive review as to which type of predictive accuracy measures and data visualization techniques are most useful for assessing these models.

methodsWe assessed the performance of the models for predicting risk using various methodologies, some of which include: receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, histograms of classification probability, and the novel use of the quantile-quantile plot. These measures have variable interpretability depending on factors such as whether the dataset is balanced in terms of numbers of genetic variants classified as risk variants versus those that are not.

resultsWe conclude that the area under the curve (AUC) is a suitable starting place, and for models with similar AUCs, violin plots are particularly useful for examining the distribution of the risk scores.

Indexed as

Models, GeneticQuantitative Trait LociAlgorithmsArea Under CurveComputer SimulationDatabases, GeneticGenome, HumanHumansRiskROC Curve

Identifiers

PMID25997848
PMCPMC4440290

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.