Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41584515›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in bioinformatics2025

Genetic risk predictions using deep learning models with summary data.

Angela Wang, Elena Xiao, Jason Cheng, Xiaoxi Shen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in bioinformatics, 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.

Angela WangUniversity School of Milwaukee, Milwaukee, WI, United States.
Elena XiaoDepartment of Mathematics, Texas State University, San Marcos, TX, United States.
Jason ChengDepartment of Mathematics, Texas State University, San Marcos, TX, United States.
Xiaoxi ShenDepartment of Mathematics, Texas State University, San Marcos, TX, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: As a driving force of the Fourth Industrial Revolution, deep learning methods have achieved significant success across various fields, including genetic and genomic studies. While individual-level genetic data is ideal for deep learning models, privacy concerns and data-sharing restrictions often limit its availability to researchers. Methods: In this paper, we investigated the potential applications of deep learning models-including deep neural networks, convolutional neural networks, recurrent neural networks, and transformers-when only genetic summary data, such as linkage disequilibrium matrices, is available. The bootstrap method was used to approximate the test error. Simulation studies and real data analyses were conducted to compare the performance of deep learning methods in genetic risk prediction using individual-level genetic data versus genetic summary data. Results: The test mean squared errors (MSEs) of most applied deep learning models are comparable when using individual-level data versus summary data. Conclusion: Our results suggest that suitable deep learning methods could also serve as an alternative approach to predict disease related traits when only linkage disequilibrium matrices are available as input.

Indexed as

bootstrapdeep neural networkslinkage disequilibriumrisk predictionsingle nucleotide polymorphisms

Identifiers

PMID41584515
PMCPMC12823927

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.