ArticleFrontiers in genetics2025
Analysis of follow-up data in large biobank cohorts: a review of methodology.
Article in Frontiers in genetics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Genome-Wide Polygenic Score for Muscle Strength Predicts Risk for Common Diseases and Lifespan: A Prospective Cohort Study.The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study focuses on key methodological challenges in genome-wide association studies (GWAS) of biobank data with time-to-event outcomes, analyzed using the Cox proportional hazards (CPH) model. We address four primary issues: left-truncation of the data, computational inefficiency of standard model-fitting algorithms, relatedness among individuals, and model misspecification. To manage left-truncation, the common practice is to use age as the timescale, with individuals entering the risk set at their age of recruitment. We assess how this choice of timescale influences bias and statistical power, under realistic GWAS conditions of varying effect sizes and censoring rates. In addition, to alleviate the computational burden typical in large-scale data, we propose and evaluate a two-step martingale residual (MR) approach for high-dimensional CPH modeling. Our results show that the timescale choice has minimal effect on accuracy for small hazard ratios, though using time since birth as the timescale - ignoring recruitment age - yields the highest power for association detection. We find that relatedness, when ignored, does not substantially bias effect size estimates, while omitting key covariates introduces significant bias. The two-step MR approach proves to be computationally efficient, retaining power for detecting small effect sizes, making it suitable for large-scale association studies. However, when precise effect size estimates are critical, particularly for moderate or larger effect sizes, we recommend recalculating these estimates using the conventional CPH model, with careful attention to left-truncation and relatedness. These conclusions are drawn from simulations and illustrated with data from the Estonian Biobank cohort.
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.