Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37713023›Full record

ArticleBehavior genetics2023

Guidelines for Evaluating the Comparability of Down-Sampled GWAS Summary Statistics.

Camille M Williams, Holly Poore, Peter T Tanksley, Hyeokmoon Kweon, Natasia S Courchesne-Krak, Diego Londono-Correa, Travis T Mallard, Peter Barr, Philipp D Koellinger, Irwin D Waldman and 5 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Behavior genetics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing 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

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors.

Camille M WilliamsDepartment of Psychology, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA. williams.m.camille@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0002-1471-6566
Holly PooreDepartment of Psychiatry, Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0235-6070
Peter T TanksleyPopulation Research Center, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3449-2838
Hyeokmoon KweonDepartment of Economics, School of Business and Economics, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-3649-0457
Natasia S Courchesne-KrakDepartment of Psychiatry, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9231-647X
Diego Londono-CorreaPopulation Research Center, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1629-590X
Travis T MallardPsychiatric and Neurodevelopmental Genetics Unit, Center for Genomic Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3265-3001
Peter BarrDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, SUNY Downstate Health Sciences University, Brooklyn, NY, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9321-657X
Philipp D KoellingerDepartment of Economics, School of Business and Economics, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-7413-0412
Irwin D WaldmanDepartment of Psychology, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6862-1837
Sandra Sanchez-RoigeDepartment of Psychiatry, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-6137-5699
K Paige HardenDepartment of Psychology, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1557-6737
Abraham A PalmerDepartment of Psychiatry, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3634-0747
Danielle M DickDepartment of Psychiatry, Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ, USA. danielle.m.dick@rutgers.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-1636-893X
Richard Karlsson LinnérDepartment of Economics, Universiteit Leiden, Leiden, The Netherlands. r.karlsson.linner@law.leidenuniv.nl.ORCID 0000-0001-7839-2858

Funding

Subject CollectionU10AA008401 · NIAAA · SUNY DOWNSTATE MEDICAL CENTER · PI Jacquelyn Leigh Meyers · 1989 to 2026
$162.7M
Project 5 - Genetic architecture of alcohol use disorder using cross-trait genetic correlations and public next-generation sequencing studiesP50AA022537 · NIAAA · VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY · PI JILL C BETTINGER · 2014 to 2026
$19.6M
The development of alcohol misuse and related problems from adolescence to early midlifeR01AA015416 · NIAAA · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI DICK, DANIELLE M, SALVATORE, JESSICA E · 2005 to 2024
$7.6M
Interdisciplinary Research Fellowship in NeuroAIDSR25MH081482 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI MARIANA CHERNER · 2007 to 2026
$5.2M
Using the Genetic Architecture of Substance Use Disorders to Advance Gene Identification and Understanding of Pathways of RiskR01DA050721 · NIDA · VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY · PI DANIELLE M DICK · 2020 to 2026
$3.9M
A Framework for Translating Polygenic Findings Related to Alcohol Use Disorder Across SpeciesR01AA029688 · NIAAA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI Hae Kyung Im, Abraham A Palmer · 2022 to 2026
$3.1M
Environmental, Genetic, and Epigenetic Mechanisms for Hormonal ChangeR01HD092548 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN · PI HARDEN, KATHRYN PAIGE · 2019 to 2023
$3.0M
Building Bridges to Allow Cross-species Translational genetics for the Study of AddictionDP1DA054394 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI SANCHEZ ROIGE, SANDRA · 2021 to 2025
$2.4M
Twin, molecular, and developmental approaches to understanding alcohol misuseK02AA018755 · NIAAA · VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY · PI DICK, DANIELLE M · 2010 to 2019
$1.3M
NIAAA NIH HHS K02 AA018755NIAAA NIH HHS P50 AA022537NIAAA NIH HHS R01 AA015416NIAAA NIH HHS R01 AA029688NIAAA NIH HHS U10 AA008401NICHD NIH HHS R01 HD092548NIDA NIH HHS DP1 DA054394NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA050721NIMH NIH HHS R25 MH081482
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Proprietary genetic datasets are valuable for boosting the statistical power of genome-wide association studies (GWASs), but their use can restrict investigators from publicly sharing the resulting summary statistics. Although researchers can resort to sharing down-sampled versions that exclude restricted data, down-sampling reduces power and might change the genetic etiology of the phenotype being studied. These problems are further complicated when using multivariate GWAS methods, such as genomic structural equation modeling (Genomic SEM), that model genetic correlations across multiple traits. Here, we propose a systematic approach to assess the comparability of GWAS summary statistics that include versus exclude restricted data. Illustrating this approach with a multivariate GWAS of an externalizing factor, we assessed the impact of down-sampling on (1) the strength of the genetic signal in univariate GWASs, (2) the factor loadings and model fit in multivariate Genomic SEM, (3) the strength of the genetic signal at the factor level, (4) insights from gene-property analyses, (5) the pattern of genetic correlations with other traits, and (6) polygenic score analyses in independent samples. For the externalizing GWAS, although down-sampling resulted in a loss of genetic signal and fewer genome-wide significant loci; the factor loadings and model fit, gene-property analyses, genetic correlations, and polygenic score analyses were found robust. Given the importance of data sharing for the advancement of open science, we recommend that investigators who generate and share down-sampled summary statistics report these analyses as accompanying documentation to support other researchers' use of the summary statistics.

Indexed as

Genome-Wide Association StudyPolymorphism, Single NucleotideGenomicsMultifactorial InheritancePhenotypeData removalDown-sampleGenome-wide association studyGenomicsGenomic SEMLeave-one-outMeta-analysisSummary statistics

Identifiers

PMID37713023
PMCPMC10584908

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.