ArticleGenetic epidemiology2018
Properties of global- and local-ancestry adjustments in genetic association tests in admixed populations.
Article in Genetic epidemiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
38 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Trans-ancestry, Bayesian meta-analysis discovers 20 novel risk loci for inflammatory bowel disease in an African American, East Asian and European cohort.Human molecular genetics · 2023Pooled it
- TLS-Tractor: A transfer learning framework for incorporating summary-statistics into local ancestry-aware GWAS in admixed populations.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- Extending genome-wide association studies to admixed cohorts with high degrees of relatedness.Nature genetics · 2026Article
- OmiGA for ultra-efficient molecular quantitative trait loci mapping.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Recommendations for responsible use of population descriptors in polygenic risk score development.Nature genetics · 2025Review
- Genetics of Common Obesity in Children and Adolescents.Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2025Review
- Methodological opportunities in genomic data analysis to advance health equity.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2025Review
- SURFBAT: a surrogate family based association test building on large imputation reference panels.G3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2025Article
- Opportunities and challenges of local ancestry in genetic association analyses.American journal of human genetics · 2025Review
- Characterizing substructure via mixture modeling in large-scale genetic summary statistics.American journal of human genetics · 2025Article
- Functionally-informed fine-mapping identifies genetic variants linking increased CHD1L expression and HIV restriction in monocytes.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- The Fate of a Polygenic Phenotype Within the Genomic Landscapes of Introgression in the European Seabass Hybrid Zone.Molecular biology and evolution · 2024Article
- Exploring the relationship between admixture and genetic susceptibility to attention deficit hyperactivity disorder in two Latin American cohorts.Journal of human genetics · 2024Article
- Characterizing substructure via mixture modeling in large-scale genetic summary statistics.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
- Joint multi-ancestry and admixed GWAS reveals the complex genetics behind human cranial vault shape.Nature communications · 2023Review
- Strategies for the Genomic Analysis of Admixed Populations.Annual review of biomedical data science · 2023Review
- Impact of cross-ancestry genetic architecture on GWASs in admixed populations.American journal of human genetics · 2023Article
- Admixture mapping identifies novel Alzheimer's disease risk regions in African Americans.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2023Article
- Multi-Omics Studies in Historically Excluded Populations: The Road to Equity.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2023Review
- Impact of cross-ancestry genetic architecture on GWAS in admixed populations.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Population substructure can lead to confounding in tests for genetic association, and failure to adjust properly can result in spurious findings. Here we address this issue of confounding by considering the impact of global ancestry (average ancestry across the genome) and local ancestry (ancestry at a specific chromosomal location) on regression parameters and relative power in ancestry-adjusted and -unadjusted models. We examine theoretical expectations under different scenarios for population substructure; applying different regression models, verifying and generalizing using simulations, and exploring the findings in real-world admixed populations. We show that admixture does not lead to confounding when the trait locus is tested directly in a single admixed population. However, if there is more complex population structure or a marker locus in linkage disequilibrium (LD) with the trait locus is tested, both global and local ancestry can be confounders. Additionally, we show the genotype parameters of adjusted and unadjusted models all provide tests for LD between the marker and trait locus, but in different contexts. The local ancestry adjusted model tests for LD in the ancestral populations, while tests using the unadjusted and the global ancestry adjusted models depend on LD in the admixed population(s), which may be enriched due to different ancestral allele frequencies. Practically, this implies that global-ancestry adjustment should be used for screening, but local-ancestry adjustment may better inform fine mapping and provide better effect estimates at trait loci.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.