ArticleScientific reports2023
A diverse ancestrally-matched reference panel increases genotype imputation accuracy in a underrepresented population.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Exploring imputation performance of phenotype-associated SNPs for forensic prediction models.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- A reanalysis of a genome-wide association study on breast cancer in Asian populations using the SG10K_Health reference panel for imputation: a multi-Centre case-control analysis.Human molecular genetics · 2026Article
- Establishing Best Practices for Clinical GWAS: Tackling Imputation and Data Quality Challenges.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Variant imputation, a common practice in genome-wide association studies, relies on reference panels to infer unobserved genotypes. Multiple public reference panels are currently available with variations in size, sequencing depth, and represented populations. Currently, limited data exist regarding the performance of public reference panels when used in an imputation of populations underrepresented in the reference panel. Here, we compare the performance of various public reference panels: 1000 Genomes Project, Haplotype Reference Consortium, GenomeAsia 100 K, and the recent Trans-Omics for Precision Medicine (TOPMed) program, when used in an imputation of samples from the Thai population. Genotype yields were assessed, and imputation accuracies were examined by comparison with high-depth whole genome sequencing data of the same sample. We found that imputation using the TOPMed panel yielded the largest number of variants (~ 271 million). Despite being the smallest in size, GenomeAsia 100 K achieved the best imputation accuracy with a median genotype concordance rate of 0.97. For rare variants, GenomeAsia 100 K also offered the best accuracy, although rare variants were less accurately imputable than common variants (30.3% reduction in concordance rates). The high accuracy observed when using GenomeAsia 100 K is likely attributable to the diverse representation of populations genetically similar to the study cohort emphasizing the benefits of sequencing populations classically underrepresented in human genomics.
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.