Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42888453›Full record

ArticleGenomics & informatics2026

The reference shapes the signal: chrX genotype summaries and classifier sex disparity between GRCh38 and T2T-CHM13 callsets.

R Craig Stillwell

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Genomics & informatics, 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

1 author.

R Craig StillwellIndependent Researcher, Hodgenville, KY, 42748, USA. craig.stillwell@gmail.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Laboratories that move from GRCh38 to T2T-CHM13 take on a new callset as well as a new assembly. I asked whether the move changes sex-chromosome genotype summaries, and whether it changes how well classifiers trained on those summaries serve males and females. I compared the published 1000 Genomes GRCh38 and T2T-CHM13 callsets for 3,202 people. The two callsets come from different alignment, calling, phasing and filtering workflows, so every difference below belongs to the reference and its pipeline together. In women, the fraction of non-reference chrX genotypes that were heterozygous was 0.605 on GRCh38 and 0.644 on T2T. It fell in African-ancestry women and rose in the other four superpopulations. The rise came from fewer non-reference homozygous genotypes (- 7,757 per woman) and not from more heterozygous ones (- 1,504). Five classifier families were trained on six chrX summaries to predict superpopulation, and the male-female gap in balanced accuracy was compared between callsets. Women were classified better than men under both callsets. Logistic regression, random forest and XGBoost widened that gap on T2T, and the support vector machine and the perceptron narrowed it. After correction across all 20 tests, random forest, XGBoost and the support vector machine remained significant. Separating relatives did not remove the disagreement. Classifiers built from the first 500 common SNPs per chromosome in file order showed no change after correction. The gap measures model performance, not biological sex bias. Resolving the assembly from its callset requires processing the same reads through one pipeline against both references.

Indexed as

BioinformaticsMachine learningReference genomeSex chromosomesT2T-CHM13Variant calling

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.