Pathway-based analysis of rare and common variants to test for association with blood pressure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Our goal is to test the effect of both rare and common variants in a blood pressure study. We use a pathway-based approach, gene-set enrichment analysis, to search for related genes affecting 4 phenotypes: systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, the difference between each of them and mean arterial pressure, which is a weighted linear combination of systolic and diastolic blood pressure. Using the real Genetic Analysis Workshop 18 data, we consider both rare and common variants in our analysis and incorporate other covariates by using a recently proposed test statistic. Our study identified a commonly enriched gene set/pathway for the two derived phenotypes we analyzed: the difference between systolic and diastolic blood pressure and mean arterial pressure, but none is identified with the individual blood pressure phenotypes. The gene CD47, in the enriched gene pathway/set, was reported in previous studies to be related to blood pressure. The findings are not surprising because the sample size we use in our analysis is small, and hence power to detect small but important effects is likely inadequate.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".