Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28751670›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2017

Inclusion of Population-specific Reference Panel from India to the 1000 Genomes Phase 3 Panel Improves Imputation Accuracy.

Meraj Ahmad, Anubhav Sinha, Sreya Ghosh, Vikrant Kumar, Sonia Davila, Chittaranjan S Yajnik, Giriraj R Chandak

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
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

7 authors.

Meraj AhmadGenomic Research on Complex diseases (GRC Group), CSIR-Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology, Hyderabad, Telangana, 500 007, India.
Anubhav SinhaGenomic Research on Complex diseases (GRC Group), CSIR-Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology, Hyderabad, Telangana, 500 007, India.
Sreya GhoshGenomic Research on Complex diseases (GRC Group), CSIR-Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology, Hyderabad, Telangana, 500 007, India.
Vikrant KumarDuke-NUS Medical School, 8 College Road, Singapore, 169857, Singapore.
Sonia DavilaDuke-NUS Medical School, 8 College Road, Singapore, 169857, Singapore.
Chittaranjan S YajnikDiabetes Unit, King Edward Memorial Hospital and Research Centre, Rasta Peth, Pune, Maharashtra, 411 011, India.
Giriraj R ChandakGenomic Research on Complex diseases (GRC Group), CSIR-Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology, Hyderabad, Telangana, 500 007, India. chandakgrc@ccmb.res.in.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Imputation is a computational method based on the principle of haplotype sharing allowing enrichment of genome-wide association study datasets. It depends on the haplotype structure of the population and density of the genotype data. The 1000 Genomes Project led to the generation of imputation reference panels which have been used globally. However, recent studies have shown that population-specific panels provide better enrichment of genome-wide variants. We compared the imputation accuracy using 1000 Genomes phase 3 reference panel and a panel generated from genome-wide data on 407 individuals from Western India (WIP). The concordance of imputed variants was cross-checked with next-generation re-sequencing data on a subset of genomic regions. Further, using the genome-wide data from 1880 individuals, we demonstrate that WIP works better than the 1000 Genomes phase 3 panel and when merged with it, significantly improves the imputation accuracy throughout the minor allele frequency range. We also show that imputation using only South Asian component of the 1000 Genomes phase 3 panel works as good as the merged panel, making it computationally less intensive job. Thus, our study stresses that imputation accuracy using 1000 Genomes phase 3 panel can be further improved by including population-specific reference panels from South Asia.

Indexed as

Genetics, PopulationGenetic VariationGenome, HumanHuman Genome ProjectAllelesAsiaAsian PeopleComputational BiologyGene FrequencyGenome-Wide Association StudyHaplotypesHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHumansReference ValuesWhite People

Identifiers

PMID28751670
PMCPMC5532257

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.