ArticleScientific reports2026
Exploring imputation performance of phenotype-associated SNPs for forensic prediction models.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Imputing single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) to expand genotyped SNP panels is commonly applied to study genotype-phenotype correlations in medical and population genetics but is largely unexplored in forensics. Forensic DNA phenotyping, i.e., the SNP-based phenotype prediction, can greatly benefit from imputing missing prediction model SNPs. Unfortunately, most imputation studies investigate the performance of random SNPs with limited focus on phenotype-associated SNPs. Here, we compare the imputation accuracy of SNPs leveraged in phenotype prediction models, phenotype-associated SNPs and all SNPs and explore the performance of phenotype prediction model, HIrisPlex-S, using imputed datasets. We confirm that the number and selection of SNPs in the genotype dataset and minor allele frequencies (MAFs) are major drivers of imputation call and error rates. Phenotypic SNPs show higher imputation error rates than randomly selected SNPs due to MAF differences. Further, we provide novel insights into accurate phenotype prediction for dense SNP panels of high linkage, frequent phenotypes in the reference panel, and lenient imputation thresholds due to the detrimental effect of missing genotypes on trait prediction compared to imputation errors. Overall, we show the importance of imputation performance studies for SNPs of interest and the high applicability of SNP imputations prior to phenotype prediction.
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.