Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41188465›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Network construction using sparse Gaussian graphical model based on GWAS summary statistics.

Megh Subedi, Xuewei Cao, Byung-Jun Kim, Qiuying Sha

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. 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

4 authors.

Megh Subedi *Department of Mathematical Sciences, Michigan Technological University, Houghton, MI, USA.
Xuewei Cao *Department of Mathematical Sciences, Michigan Technological University, Houghton, MI, USA.
Byung-Jun KimDepartment of Mathematical Sciences, Michigan Technological University, Houghton, MI, USA.
Qiuying ShaDepartment of Mathematical Sciences, Michigan Technological University, Houghton, MI, USA. qsha@mtu.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In genome-wide association studies (GWAS), thousands of genetic variants are tested to identify their associations with a phenotype. GWAS have identified many strongly associated genetic variants with phenotypes and have greatly enhanced our understanding of the genetic architecture of complex phenotypes and diseases. Joint analysis of multiple phenotypes can increase the overall statistical power to detect genetic associations and allows for the identification of pleiotropic loci. A phenotype-phenotype network (PPN) represents phenotypes as nodes and the relationships between them as edges, which allows for the visualization of complex relationships between phenotypes, making it easier to identify clusters and helps us intuitively grasp how different phenotypes are related. In this study, we propose a new method to construct a PPN using the sparse Gaussian Graphical Model (sGGM) based on GWAS summary statistics. This approach isolates the direct relationship between phenotypes, making it easier to identify clusters of phenotypes conditional on other phenotypes that reflect more meaningful biological or functional connections. We then applied a community detection method to partition phenotypes into disjoint modules based on the partial correlation matrix of phenotypes. For each module, various multiple phenotype association tests can be employed to test the association between a SNP and phenotypes in that module. We conducted a comprehensive simulation study to compare the performance of several multiple phenotype association tests using the network modules obtained from sGGM, the correlation matrix, as well as using all phenotypes without modular segmentation. The simulation results demonstrated that most of the multiple phenotype association tests based on network modules from sGGM not only effectively control the Type I error rate but also exhibit higher power compared to network modules derived from the correlation matrix and the association tests on all phenotypes without modular segmentation. We applied this method to the GWAS summary statistics of 92 phenotypes derived from Chapter IX (Diseases of the circulatory system) of ICD-10 codes in the UK Biobank. The results showed that applying multiple phenotype association tests using network modules from the sGGM detected more significant SNPs than using the network modules from the correlation matrix.

Indexed as

Genome-Wide Association StudyModels, GeneticHumansNormal DistributionPhenotypePolymorphism, Single NucleotideGWAS summary statisticsMultiple-phenotype association testsPhenotype-phenotype networkSparse Gaussian graphical model

Identifiers

PMID41188465
PMCPMC12586571

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.