MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4310454025 · doi:10.1101/2022.11.29.22282912

The impact of assortative mating, participation bias, and socioeconomic status on the polygenic risk of behavioral and psychiatric traits

2022· preprint· en· W4310454025 on OpenAlexaff
Brenda Cabrera‐Mendoza, Frank R. Wendt, Gita A. Pathak, Loïc Yengo, Renato Polimanti

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2022
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic Associations and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsPublic Health OntarioUniversity of Toronto
FundersMedical Research CouncilOne MindNational Institutes of HealthAmerican Foundation for Suicide Prevention
KeywordsPolygenic risk scoreAssortative matingSocioeconomic statusBiobankCannabisPsychologyDemographyPsychiatryMatingClinical psychologyMedicineEnvironmental healthGeneticsBiologyGenotypePopulationSingle-nucleotide polymorphismGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract To investigate assortative mating (AM), participation bias, and socioeconomic status (SES) with respect to the genetics of behavioral and psychiatric traits, we analyzed gametic phase disequilibrium (GPD), within-spouses and within-siblings polygenic risk score (PRS) correlation, performing a SES conditional analysis. We observed genetic signatures of AM across multiple methods for traits related to substance use with SES conditioning increasing the within-spouses PRS correlation for Frequency of drinking alcohol (2.5% to 6%), Maximum habitual alcohol intake (1.33% to 4.43%), and Ever taken cannabis (1.5% to 5.3%). Comparing UK Biobank mental health questionnaire responders vs. non-responders, major depressive disorder PRS showed significant GPD in both groups when based on the Million Veteran Program (3.2% vs. 3%), but only in responders when based on the Psychiatric Genomics Consortium (3.8% vs. 0.2%). These results highlight the impact of AM, participation bias, and SES on the polygenic risk of behavioral and psychiatric traits.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.310 · 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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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