Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38463500›Full record

ArticleArXiv2024

Controlled Variable Selection from Summary Statistics Only? A Solution via GhostKnockoffs and Penalized Regression.

Zhaomeng Chen, Zihuai He, Benjamin B Chu, Jiaqi Gu, Tim Morrison, Chiara Sabatti, Emmanuel Candès

Abstract readPreprint
In one paragraph

Article in ArXiv, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

7 authors.

Zhaomeng ChenDepartment of Statistics, Stanford University.
Zihuai HeDepartment of Neurology and Neurological Sciences, Stanford University.
Benjamin B ChuDepartment of Biomedical Data Science, Stanford University.
Jiaqi GuDepartment of Neurology and Neurological Sciences, Stanford University.
Tim MorrisonDepartment of Statistics, Stanford University.
Chiara SabattiDepartment of Statistics, Stanford University.
Emmanuel CandèsDepartment of Statistics, Stanford University.

Funding

Stanford Alzheimer's Disease Research CenterAdmin Supp: Developing iPSC models for AD and PDP30AG066515 · NIA · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI Lisa Goldman Rosas · 2020 to 2026
$29.0M
Statistical and computational methods for integrative analysis of Alzheimer's Disease geneticsR01AG066206 · NIA · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI HE, ZIHUAI · 2019 to 2023
$3.5M
The pursuit of genetic causal mechanismsR56HG010812 · NHGRI · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI SABATTI, CHIARA · 2021 to 2022
$875k
NHGRI NIH HHS R56 HG010812NIA NIH HHS P30 AG066515NIA NIH HHS R01 AG066206
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Identifying which variables do influence a response while controlling false positives pervades statistics and data science. In this paper, we consider a scenario in which we only have access to summary statistics, such as the values of marginal empirical correlations between each dependent variable of potential interest and the response. This situation may arise due to privacy concerns, e.g., to avoid the release of sensitive genetic information. We extend GhostKnockoffs He et al. [2022] and introduce variable selection methods based on penalized regression achieving false discovery rate (FDR) control. We report empirical results in extensive simulation studies, demonstrating enhanced performance over previous work. We also apply our methods to genome-wide association studies of Alzheimer's disease, and evidence a significant improvement in power.

Indexed as

false discovery rate (FDR)genome-wide association study (GWAS)knockoffspseudo-lassoreplicabilitysummary statisticsVariable selection

Identifiers

PMID38463500
PMCPMC10925382

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.