Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36406474›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in artificial intelligence2022

An autoencoder-based deep learning method for genotype imputation.

Meng Song, Jonathan Greenbaum, Joseph Luttrell, Weihua Zhou, Chong Wu, Zhe Luo, Chuan Qiu, Lan Juan Zhao, Kuan-Jui Su, Qing Tian and 6 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in artificial intelligence, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
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

16 authors.

Meng SongSchool of Computing Sciences and Computer Engineering, University of Southern Mississippi, Hattiesburg, MS, United States.
Jonathan GreenbaumTulane Center of Biomedical Informatics and Genomics, School of Medicine, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA, United States.
Joseph LuttrellSchool of Computing Sciences and Computer Engineering, University of Southern Mississippi, Hattiesburg, MS, United States.
Weihua ZhouCollege of Computing, Michigan Technological University, Houghton, MI, United States.
Chong WuDepartment of Biostatistics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States.
Zhe LuoTulane Center of Biomedical Informatics and Genomics, School of Medicine, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA, United States.
Chuan QiuTulane Center of Biomedical Informatics and Genomics, School of Medicine, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA, United States.
Lan Juan ZhaoTulane Center of Biomedical Informatics and Genomics, School of Medicine, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA, United States.
Kuan-Jui SuTulane Center of Biomedical Informatics and Genomics, School of Medicine, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA, United States.
Qing TianTulane Center of Biomedical Informatics and Genomics, School of Medicine, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA, United States.
Hui ShenTulane Center of Biomedical Informatics and Genomics, School of Medicine, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA, United States.
Huixiao HongDivision of Bioinformatics and Biostatistics, National Center for Toxicological Research, US Food and Drug Administration, Jefferson, AR, United States.
Ping GongEnvironmental Laboratory, U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, MS, United States.
Xinghua ShiDepartment of Computer & Information Sciences, Temple University, Philadelphia, PA, United States.
Hong-Wen DengTulane Center of Biomedical Informatics and Genomics, School of Medicine, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA, United States.
Chaoyang ZhangSchool of Computing Sciences and Computer Engineering, University of Southern Mississippi, Hattiesburg, MS, United States.

Funding

Tulane COBRE in Cardiometabolic Diseases Clinical Research CoreP20GM109036 · NIGMS · TULANE UNIVERSITY OF LOUISIANA · PI Ning Liu · 2016 to 2026
$25.3M
Trans-omics Integration of Multi-omics Studies for OsteoporosisU19AG055373 · NIA · TULANE UNIVERSITY OF LOUISIANA · PI Qi Zhao · 2017 to 2026
$24.3M
Identification of Metabolomic Profiles for Sarcopenia Traits in Older Whites and BlacksR01AG061917 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE HEALTH SCI CTR · PI SHEN, HUI, ZHAO, QI · 2019 to 2023
$3.0M
Decoding Methylation Mediated Epigenomic Contributions to Male OsteoporosisR01AR069055 · NIAMS · TULANE UNIVERSITY OF LOUISIANA · PI DENG, HONG-WEN · 2017 to 2021
$2.9M
NIAMS NIH HHS R01 AR069055NIA NIH HHS R01 AG061917NIA NIH HHS U19 AG055373NIGMS NIH HHS P20 GM109036
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genotype imputation has a wide range of applications in genome-wide association study (GWAS), including increasing the statistical power of association tests, discovering trait-associated loci in meta-analyses, and prioritizing causal variants with fine-mapping. In recent years, deep learning (DL) based methods, such as sparse convolutional denoising autoencoder (SCDA), have been developed for genotype imputation. However, it remains a challenging task to optimize the learning process in DL-based methods to achieve high imputation accuracy. To address this challenge, we have developed a convolutional autoencoder (AE) model for genotype imputation and implemented a customized training loop by modifying the training process with a single batch loss rather than the average loss over batches. This modified AE imputation model was evaluated using a yeast dataset, the human leukocyte antigen (HLA) data from the 1,000 Genomes Project (1KGP), and our in-house genotype data from the Louisiana Osteoporosis Study (LOS). Our modified AE imputation model has achieved comparable or better performance than the existing SCDA model in terms of evaluation metrics such as the concordance rate (CR), the Hellinger score, the scaled Euclidean norm (SEN) score, and the imputation quality score (IQS) in all three datasets. Taking the imputation results from the HLA data as an example, the AE model achieved an average CR of 0.9468 and 0.9459, Hellinger score of 0.9765 and 0.9518, SEN score of 0.9977 and 0.9953, and IQS of 0.9515 and 0.9044 at missing ratios of 10% and 20%, respectively. As for the results of LOS data, it achieved an average CR of 0.9005, Hellinger score of 0.9384, SEN score of 0.9940, and IQS of 0.8681 at the missing ratio of 20%. In summary, our proposed method for genotype imputation has a great potential to increase the statistical power of GWAS and improve downstream post-GWAS analyses.

Indexed as

autoencoderdeep learninggenotype imputationGWASpaired sample t-test

Identifiers

PMID36406474
PMCPMC9671213

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.