MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2755962885 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0185174

The performance of a new local false discovery rate method on tests of association between coronary artery disease (CAD) and genome-wide genetic variants

2017· article· en· W2755962885 on OpenAlexafffund
Shuyan Mei, Ali Karimnezhad, Marie Forest, David R. Bickel, Celia M.T. Greenwood

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic Associations and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsJewish General HospitalUniversity of OttawaOttawa HospitalMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsFalse discovery rateCADCoronary artery diseaseMinor allele frequencyGenome-wide association studyGenetic associationSingle-nucleotide polymorphismAnnotationMultiple comparisons problemComputational biologyBiologyGeneticsAlleleAllele frequencyBioinformaticsMedicineInternal medicineStatisticsMathematicsGenotypeGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The maximum entropy (ME) method is a recently-developed approach for estimating local false discovery rates (LFDR) that incorporates external information allowing assignment of a subset of tests to a category with a different prior probability of following the null hypothesis. Using this ME method, we have reanalyzed the findings from a recent large genome-wide association study of coronary artery disease (CAD), incorporating biologic annotations. Our revised LFDR estimates show many large reductions in LFDR, particularly among the genetic variants belonging to annotation categories that were known to be of particular interest for CAD. However, among SNPs with rare minor allele frequencies, the reductions in LFDR were modest in size.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.058
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.202
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.058
Threshold uncertainty score0.304

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0580.202
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.238 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONE→Same topicGenetic Associations and Epidemiology→French-language works237,207→