MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2773102674 · doi:10.1002/gepi.22099

Two‐phase designs for joint quantitative‐trait‐dependent and genotype‐dependent sampling in post‐GWAS regional sequencing

2017· article· en· W2773102674 on OpenAlexafffund
Osvaldo Espin‐Garcia, Radu V. Craiu, Shelley B. Bull

Bibliographic record

VenueGenetic Epidemiology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic Associations and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsSinai Health SystemLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research InstitutePublic Health OntarioUniversity of Toronto
FundersFP7 Ideas: European Research CouncilNational Institute of General Medical SciencesNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchEuropean Research CouncilNational Institutes of HealthUniversity of TorontoCompute CanadaCanada Foundation for InnovationGovernment of Ontario
KeywordsGenome-wide association studyCovariateSingle-nucleotide polymorphismSNPInferenceQuantitative trait locusGenetic associationStatisticsBiologySample size determinationGeneticsComputational biologyComputer scienceGenotypeMathematicsArtificial intelligenceGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We evaluate two-phase designs to follow-up findings from genome-wide association study (GWAS) when the cost of regional sequencing in the entire cohort is prohibitive. We develop novel expectation-maximization-based inference under a semiparametric maximum likelihood formulation tailored for post-GWAS inference. A GWAS-SNP (where SNP is single nucleotide polymorphism) serves as a surrogate covariate in inferring association between a sequence variant and a normally distributed quantitative trait (QT). We assess test validity and quantify efficiency and power of joint QT-SNP-dependent sampling and analysis under alternative sample allocations by simulations. Joint allocation balanced on SNP genotype and extreme-QT strata yields significant power improvements compared to marginal QT- or SNP-based allocations. We illustrate the proposed method and evaluate the sensitivity of sample allocation to sampling variation using data from a sequencing study of systolic blood pressure.

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)0.056
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.109
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.296

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0560.109
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.206
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations5
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenetic EpidemiologySame topicGenetic Associations and EpidemiologyFrench-language works237,207