A genome‐wide association study of multiple longitudinal traits with related subjects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pleiotropy is a phenomenon that a single gene inflicts multiple correlated phenotypic effects, often characterized as traits, involving multiple biological systems. We propose a two-stage method to identify pleiotropic effects on multiple longitudinal traits from a family-based data set. The first stage analyzes each longitudinal trait via a three-level mixed-effects model. Random effects at the subject-level and at the family-level measure the subject-specific genetic effects and between-subjects intraclass correlations within families, respectively. The second stage performs a simultaneous association test between a single nucleotide polymorphism and all subject-specific effects for multiple longitudinal traits. This is performed using a quasi-likelihood scoring method in which the correlation structure among related subjects is adjusted. Two simulation studies for the proposed method are undertaken to assess both the type I error control and the power. Furthermore, we demonstrate the utility of the two-stage method in identifying pleiotropic genes or loci by analyzing the Genetic Analysis Workshop 16 Problem 2 cohort data drawn from the Framingham Heart Study and illustrate an example of the kind of complexity in data that can be handled by the proposed approach. We establish that our two-stage method can identify pleiotropic effects whilst accommodating varying data types in the model.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".