Shared genetic architecture of brain age gap across 30 cohorts worldwide
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Deviations from normative brain ageing trajectories are linked to a wide range of adverse health outcomes. A number of brain age prediction models have been developed, based on various neuroimaging modalities, machine learning algorithms, training samples, and age ranges. However, it remains unknown whether these models converge on a shared genetic liability, and whether capturing this shared signal could provide a more sensitive marker of brain health than any single model alone. We first conducted a new brain age gap (BAG) GWAS in a sample of 60,735 individuals across 29 cohorts worldwide, and then applied genomic structural equation modelling to examine the shared genetic variance between five prior BAG GWASs and our new analysis, using a single latent BAG factor (30 cohorts overall). All six BAG GWASs loaded onto a single factor, explaining 63% of the total genetic variance. We identified 19 independent SNPs associated with the BAG factor, including four novel associations. Genetically, the BAG factor was positively correlated with multiple traits, with blood pressure, smoking, longevity, autism, and sleep showing putatively causal effects. A polygenic score (PGS) for the BAG factor showed associations with phenotypic BAGs already in childhood, with stronger links observed in adulthood. Phenome-wide association analyses indicated that BAG factor PGS captured associations with more health traits than individual BAG PGSs. Our findings underscore the importance of considering the shared variance across different BAG constructs to identify robust correlates of poor brain health.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".