ArticleAmerican journal of human genetics2025
Beyond predictive R
Article in American journal of human genetics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Genetic architectures of brain-related traits are shaped by strong selective constraints.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
- Optimizing phenotype scale improves genetic analyses in large-scale biobanks.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Enhancing polygenic risk prediction by modeling quantile-specific genetic effects.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- The geometry of G × E: How scaling and endogenous treatment effects shape interaction direction.PLoS genetics · 2026Article
- Genetic architectures of brain-related traits are shaped by strong selective constraints.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Three open questions in polygenic score portability.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Choice of phenotype scale is critical in biobank-based G×E tests.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Polygenic scores (PGSs) are genetic predictions of trait values or disease risk that are increasingly finding applications in clinical predictive models and basic genetics research. However, the predictive value of a PGS can vary within similar population groups, depending on characteristics such as the environmental exposures, sex, age, or socioeconomic status of the individuals. To maximize the value of a PGS, approaches to screen trait-PGS pairs for evidence of such heterogeneity without having to specify the relevant exposure or individual characteristics would be useful. Here, in analyses from the UK Biobank, we show that a PGS's predictive accuracy depends on the quantile of the phenotypic distribution to which the PGS is being applied. We quantify differences in predictive value across the phenotypic range using quantile regression linear models to estimate quantile-specific effect sizes for linear models of phenotype values as a function of PGS. Of 25 continuous traits, only three have no quantile-specific effect sizes that varied by at least 1.2-fold from the ordinary least squares estimate. Through simulation, we demonstrate that this heterogeneity of PGS predictive value can arise from gene-by-environment interactions. Our approach can be used to flag traits where the use of PGSs warrants extra caution, and perhaps stratification variables should be sought and used because PGSs perform substantially differently in portions of the sampled population than expected from quoted predictive R
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.