ArticleCommunications medicine2025
Using genomic context informed genotype data and within-model ancestry adjustment to classify type 2 diabetes.
Article in Communications medicine, 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.
- Integrating Genetic, Environmental, Cognitive, and Temperament Data for ADHD Prediction in Explainable Deep Learning Models.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDespite high heritability estimates, complex genetic disorders have proven difficult to predict with genetic data. Genomic research has documented polygenic inheritance, cross-disorder genetic correlations, and enrichment of risk by functional genomic annotation, but the vast potential of that combined knowledge has not yet been leveraged to build optimal risk models. Additional methods are likely required to progress genetic risk models of complex genetic disorders towards clinical utility.
methodsWe developed a modeling framework that uses annotations providing genomic context alongside genotype data as input to convolutional neural networks. To test this framework, we used a matched-pairs dataset of individuals with and without type 2 diabetes. We compared the performance of models trained on genotype data alone to those trained on context-informed genotype data. We also introduced adversarial tasks to remove the ability of models to predict genetic ancestry while assessing whether risk prediction performance was preserved.
resultsHere, we show that a neural network using genotype data (AUC: 0.66) and a convolutional neural network using context-informed genotype data (AUC: 0.65) both significantly outperform polygenic risk score approaches in classifying type-2 diabetes. Adversarial ancestry tasks eliminate the predictability of ancestry without changing model performance.
conclusionsWe present neural network approaches that improve classification performance by integrating genotype data with genomic context while accounting for ancestry. Although current performance is not yet sufficient for clinical use in type 2 diabetes, incremental advances such as these may help move genetic risk prediction toward future clinical utility.
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.