A statistical method for image-mediated association studies discovers genes and pathways associated with four brain disorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Brain imaging and genomics are critical tools enabling characterization of the genetic basis of brain disorders. However, imaging large cohorts is expensive, and may be unavailable for legacy datasets used for genome-wide association studies (GWAS). Using an integrated feature selection/aggregation model, we developed Image-Mediated Association Study (IMAS), which utilizes borrowed imaging/genomics data to conduct association mapping in legacy GWAS cohorts. By leveraging the UK Biobank image-derived phenotypes (IDPs), IMAS discovered genetic bases underlying four neuropsychiatric disorders and verified them by analyzing annotations, pathways, and expression Quantitative Trait Loci (eQTLs). A cerebellar-mediated mechanism was identified to be common to the four disorders. Simulations show that, if the goal is identifying genetic risk, IMAS is more powerful than a hypothetical protocol in which the imaging results were available in the GWAS dataset. This implies the feasibility of reanalyzing legacy GWAS datasets without conducting additional imaging, yielding cost-savings for integrated analysis of genetics and imaging.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".