↓ Skip to main content

Comparison of methods that use whole genome data to estimate the heritability and genetic architecture of complex traits

Overview of attention for article published in Nature Genetics, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
104 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
221 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
355 Mendeley
citeulike
5 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Comparison of methods that use whole genome data to estimate the heritability and genetic architecture of complex traits
Published in
Nature Genetics, April 2018
DOI 10.1038/s41588-018-0108-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Luke M. Evans, Rasool Tahmasbi, Scott I. Vrieze, Gonçalo R. Abecasis, Sayantan Das, Steven Gazal, Douglas W. Bjelland, Teresa R. de Candia, Haplotype Reference Consortium, Michael E. Goddard, Benjamin M. Neale, Jian Yang, Peter M. Visscher, Matthew C. Keller

Abstract

Multiple methods have been developed to estimate narrow-sense heritability, h2, using single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in unrelated individuals. However, a comprehensive evaluation of these methods has not yet been performed, leading to confusion and discrepancy in the literature. We present the most thorough and realistic comparison of these methods to date. We used thousands of real whole-genome sequences to simulate phenotypes under varying genetic architectures and confounding variables, and we used array, imputed, or whole genome sequence SNPs to obtain 'SNP-heritability' estimates. We show that SNP-heritability can be highly sensitive to assumptions about the frequencies, effect sizes, and levels of linkage disequilibrium of underlying causal variants, but that methods that bin SNPs according to minor allele frequency and linkage disequilibrium are less sensitive to these assumptions across a wide range of genetic architectures and possible confounding factors. These findings provide guidance for best practices and proper interpretation of published estimates.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 104 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 355 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 354 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 85 24%
Researcher 77 22%
Student > Master 29 8%
Student > Bachelor 28 8%
Other 17 5%
Other 56 16%
Unknown 63 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 88 25%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 85 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 25 7%
Psychology 16 5%
Computer Science 13 4%
Other 57 16%
Unknown 71 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 60. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 November 2023.
All research outputs
#724,474
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from Nature Genetics
#1,358
of 7,639 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,994
of 343,721 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Genetics
#43
of 63 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,639 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 43.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 343,721 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 63 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.