MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2922001156 · doi:10.1101/574616

Genome-Wide Polygenic Risk Scores and Prediction of Gestational Diabetes in South Asian Women

2019· preprint· en· W2922001156 on OpenAlexafffund
Amel Lamri, Shihong Mao, Dipika Desai, Milan Gupta, Guillaume Paré, Sonia S. Anand

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2019
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGestational Diabetes Research and Management
Canadian institutionsImpactCanadian Respiratory Research NetworkMcMaster UniversityPopulation Health Research Institute
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchIndian Council of Medical ResearchMcMaster UniversityHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsGestational diabetesHeritabilityMedicineDemographyLogistic regressionGenome-wide association studyObstetricsType 2 diabetesDiabetes mellitusPregnancyGenotypeBiologyInternal medicineGeneticsGestationEndocrinologySingle-nucleotide polymorphism

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Gestational diabetes Mellitus (GDM) affects 1 in 7 births and is associated with numerous adverse health outcomes for both mother and child. GDM is suspected to share a large common genetic background with type 2 diabetes (T2D). The first aim of this study, was to characterize different GDM polygenic risk scores (PRSs) using data from the South Asian Birth Cohort (START). The second aim of this study was to estimate the heritability of GDM. PRSs were derived for 832 South Asian women from START using the pruning and thresholding (P+T), LDpred, and GraBLD methods. Weights were derived from multi-ethnic (Mahajan et al ., 2014) and white Caucasian (Scott et al ., 2017) studies of the DIAGRAM consortium. Association with GDM was tested using logistic regression. Heritability of GDM was estimated using the GRMEL approach. Results were replicated in samples from the UK Biobank (UKB) study. The top P+T, LDpred and GraBLD PRSs were all based on Mahajan et al . The best PRS was highly associated with GDM in START (AUC=0.62, OR=1.60 [95% CI=1.44–1.69]), and in South Asian (AUC=0.65) and white British (AUC=0.58) women from UKB. Heritability of GDM approximated 0.55±0.83 in START and 0.18±0.22 in white British women from UKB. Our results highlight the importance of combining genome-wide genotypes and summary statistics from large multi-ethnic studies to optimize PRSs in South Asians.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicGestational Diabetes Research and Management→French-language works237,207→