ReviewBehavior genetics2024
Considerations, Caveats, and Suggestions for the Use of Polygenic Scores for Social and Behavioral Traits.
Review in Behavior genetics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Non-cognitive skills mediate education-related polygenic score associations with academic achievement across development.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Update on the genetics of allergic diseases.The Journal of allergy and clinical immunology · 2025Review
- From genetic disposition to academic achievement: The mediating role of non-cognitive skills across development.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- The shared genetic architecture and evolution of human language and musical rhythm.Nature human behaviour · 2025Article
- Race as a Risk Marker, Not a Risk Factor: Revising Race-Based Algorithms to Protect Racially Oppressed Patients.Journal of general internal medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Polygenic scores (PGS) are increasingly being used for prediction of social and behavioral traits, but suffer from many methodological, theoretical, and ethical concerns that profoundly limit their value. Primarily, these scores are derived from statistical correlations, carrying no inherent biological meaning, and thus may capture indirect effects. Further, the performance of these scores depends upon the diversity of the reference populations and the genomic panels from which they were derived, which consistently underrepresent minoritized populations, leading to poor fit when applied to diverse groups. There is also inherent danger of eugenic applications for the information gained from these scores, and general risk of misunderstandings that could lead to stigmatization for underrepresented groups. We urge extreme caution in use of PGS particularly for social/behavioral outcomes fraught for misinterpretation, with potential harm for the minoritized groups least likely to benefit from their use.
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.