PheWAS analysis on large-scale biobank data with PheTK
Bibliographic record
Abstract
SUMMARY: With the rapid growth of genetic data linked to electronic health record (EHR) data in huge cohorts, large-scale phenome-wide association study (PheWAS) have become powerful discovery tools in biomedical research. PheWAS is an analysis method to study phenotype associations utilizing longitudinal EHR data. Previous PheWAS packages were developed mostly with smaller datasets and with earlier PheWAS approaches. PheTK was designed to simplify analysis and efficiently handle biobank-scale data. PheTK uses multithreading and supports a full PheWAS workflow including extraction of data from OMOP databases and Hail matrix tables as well as PheWAS analysis for both phecode version 1.2 and phecodeX. Benchmarking results showed PheTK took 64% less time than the R PheWAS package to complete the same workflow. PheTK can be run locally or on cloud platforms such as the All of Us Researcher Workbench (All of Us) or the UK Biobank (UKB) Research Analysis Platform (RAP). AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: The PheTK package is freely available on the Python Package Index, on GitHub under GNU General Public License (GPL-3) at https://github.com/nhgritctran/PheTK, and on Zenodo, DOI 10.5281/zenodo.14217954, at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14217954. PheTK is implemented in Python and platform independent.
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 | 0.008 | 0.042 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.045 | 0.029 |
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".