ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2025
Evaluating Multi-Ancestry Genome-Wide Association Methods: Statistical Power, Population Structure, and Practical Implications.
Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The increasing availability of diverse biobanks has enabled multi-ancestry genome-wide association studies (GWAS), enhancing the discovery of genetic variants across traits and diseases. However, the choice of an optimal method remains debated due to challenges in statistical power differences across ancestral groups and approaches to account for population structure. Two primary strategies exist: (1) Pooled analysis, which combines individuals from all genetic backgrounds into a single dataset while adjusting for population stratification using principal components, increasing the sample size and statistical power but requiring careful control of population stratification. (2) Meta-analysis, which performs ancestry-group-specific GWAS and subsequently combines summary statistics, potentially capturing fine-scale population structure, but facing limitations in handling admixed individuals. Using large-scale simulations with varying sample sizes and ancestry compositions, we compare these methods alongside real data analyses of eight continuous and five binary traits from the UK Biobank (
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.