Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34587156›Full record

ArticlePLoS genetics2021

A more accurate method for colocalisation analysis allowing for multiple causal variants.

Chris Wallace

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS genetics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 386 papers, 15 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
386citing papers in PubMed, 15 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

386 citing papers in PubMed, 15 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

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

326 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

1 author.

Chris WallaceCambridge Institute of Therapeutic Immunology and Infectious Disease, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-9755-1703

Funding

Department of Health BRC-1215-20014Medical Research Council MC UU 00002/4Medical Research Council MC_UU_00002/4Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust WT107881Wellcome Trust WT220788
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In genome-wide association studies (GWAS) it is now common to search for, and find, multiple causal variants located in close proximity. It has also become standard to ask whether different traits share the same causal variants, but one of the popular methods to answer this question, coloc, makes the simplifying assumption that only a single causal variant exists for any given trait in any genomic region. Here, we examine the potential of the recently proposed Sum of Single Effects (SuSiE) regression framework, which can be used for fine-mapping genetic signals, for use with coloc. SuSiE is a novel approach that allows evidence for association at multiple causal variants to be evaluated simultaneously, whilst separating the statistical support for each variant conditional on the causal signal being considered. We show this results in more accurate coloc inference than other proposals to adapt coloc for multiple causal variants based on conditioning. We therefore recommend that coloc be used in combination with SuSiE to optimise accuracy of colocalisation analyses when multiple causal variants exist.

Indexed as

CausalityGenome-Wide Association StudyBayes TheoremGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseHumansLinkage Disequilibrium

Identifiers

PMID34587156
PMCPMC8504726

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.