Improving imputation in disease-relevant regions: lessons from cystic fibrosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Does genotype imputation with public reference panels identify variants contributing to disease? Genotype imputation using the 1000 Genomes Project (1KG; 2504 individuals) displayed poor coverage at the causal cystic fibrosis (CF) transmembrane conductance regulator ( CFTR ) locus for the International CF Gene Modifier Consortium. Imputation with the larger Haplotype Reference Consortium (HRC; 32,470 individuals) displayed improved coverage but low sensitivity of variants clinically relevant for CF. A hybrid reference that combined whole genome sequencing (WGS) from 101 CF individuals with the 1KG imputed a greater number of single-nucleotide variants (SNVs) that would be analyzed in a genetic association study ( r 2 ≥ 0.3 and MAF ≥ 0.5%) than imputation with the HRC, while the HRC excelled in the lower frequency spectrum. Using the 1KG or HRC as reference panels missed the most common CF-causing variants or displayed low imputation accuracy. Designs that incorporate population-specific WGS can improve imputation accuracy at disease-specific loci, while imputation using public data sets can omit disease-relevant genotypes.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".