An Updated Polygenic Index Repository: Expanded Phenotypes, New Cohorts, and Improved Causal Inference
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Polygenic indexes (PGIs) - DNA-based predictors of individual phenotypes - have become essential tools across biomedical and social sciences. We introduce Version 2 of the Polygenic Index Repository, which expands phenotype coverage from 47 to 61, increases the number of participating datasets from 11 to 20, and adopts a more consistent and improved methodology for PGI construction. For 16 phenotypes, we leverage summary statistics from an updated GWAS meta-analysis with greater statistical power compared to the original release, thereby improving the PGI's predictive power. To improve power for family-based analyses, we provide imputed parental PGIs in all datasets with first-degree relatives and offer a framework for interpreting results from analyses that control for parental PGIs. We illustrate the utility of parental PGIs using two applications: (1) comparing PGI associations with and without parental PGI controls for all phenotypes in two Repository datasets with family data, and (2) for BMI and diastolic blood pressure, exploring the contribution of causal versus non-causal components of PGI associations to the imperfect portability of PGIs across subgroups within a genetic ancestry. Collectively, the updates enhance predictive performance, broaden the Repository's scope, and introduce novel resources that reduce confounding bias and improve interpretability.
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 | 0.021 | 0.097 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.025 | 0.009 |
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".