Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41563515›Full record

ArticleHuman genetics2026

Evaluating genetic-based disease prediction approaches through simulation.

Max Shpak, Eric Parfitt, Soroush Mahmoudiandehkordi, Mehdi Maadooliat, Steven J Schrodi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Human genetics, 2026. 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

5 authors.

Max ShpakDepartment of Medical Genetics, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA. shpak.max@gmail.com.
Eric ParfittDepartment of Medical Genetics, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA.
Soroush MahmoudiandehkordiDepartment of Medical Genetics, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA.
Mehdi MaadooliatDepartment of Medical Genetics, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA.
Steven J SchrodiDepartment of Medical Genetics, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA. schrodi@wisc.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Common diseases exhibit substantial heritability, and GWAS of these diseases have revealed hundreds of thousands of high-frequency disease susceptibility variants throughout the genome. These studies offer the prospect of using genomic data to improve disease prediction and diagnosis, however, the relative performance of different predictive modeling approaches is not well-characterized. To investigate this systematically, we constructed a Monte Carlo simulation generating model genomes with 500 SNPs carrying risk alleles that are parameterized by the strength of their effects and by different modes of inheritance—additive, dominant, recessive, and combinations thereof. After generating genotypes for cases and controls, several machine learning classifiers (logistic regression, naïve Bayes, random forests, and neural networks, with and without feature selection) were applied to predict disease phenotypes from genotypes. Each classifier’s error rates were evaluated and compared using AUC. We found that random forest models were the most accurate predictors of disease over the range of inheritance parameters, followed by logistic regression and naïve Bayes, while the feedforward multilayer neural network model had lower AUC. We also investigated the association of AUC with the difference in polygenic risk score (PRS) between disease and control samples by comparing AUC in the simulations to the values predicted from the PRS distributions, finding a monotonic, curvilinear relationship as predicted analytically from odds-risk and liability threshold models. Our results also show that with small risk effects, the odds-risk model provided an accurate estimate of the AUC-PRS association while a liability threshold model performed better when risk alleles had strong effects.

Indexed as

Genetic Predisposition to DiseaseModels, GeneticBayes TheoremClassification AlgorithmsComputer SimulationGenetic Risk ScoreGenome-Wide Association StudyGenotypeHumansLogistic ModelsMachine LearningMonte Carlo MethodMultifactorial InheritanceNeural Networks, ComputerPhenotypePolymorphism, Single Nucleotide

Identifiers

PMID41563515
PMCPMC12823641

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.