↓ Skip to main content

Insights and Implications of Genome-Wide Association Studies of Height

Overview of attention for article published in JCEM, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
18 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
43 Mendeley
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
Insights and Implications of Genome-Wide Association Studies of Height
Published in
JCEM, July 2018
DOI 10.1210/jc.2018-01126
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael H Guo, Joel N Hirschhorn, Andrew Dauber

Abstract

In the last decade, genome wide association studies (GWAS) have catalyzed our understanding of the genetics of height and have identified hundreds of regions of the genome associated with adult height and other height-related body measurements. GWAS studies related to height were identified via Pubmed search and a review of the GWAS catalog (https://www.ebi.ac.uk/gwas/). The GWAS results demonstrate that height is highly polygenic; that is, many thousands of genetic variants distributed across the genome each contribute to an individual's height. These height-associated regions of the genome are enriched for genes in known biological pathways involved in growth such as fibroblast growth factor (FGF) signaling, as well as for genes expressed in relevant tissues such as the growth plate. GWAS can also uncover previously unappreciated biological pathways, such as the STC2/PAPPA/IGFBP4 pathway. The genes implicated by GWAS are often the same genes that are the genetic causes of Mendelian growth disorders or skeletal dysplasias, and GWAS results can provide complementary information about these disorders. Here, we review the rationale behind GWAS and what we have learned from GWAS for height, including how it has enhanced our understanding of the underlying biology of human growth. We also highlight the implications of GWAS in terms of prediction of adult height and our understanding of Mendelian growth disorders.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 18 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 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 43 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 16%
Professor 4 9%
Student > Bachelor 4 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Other 8 19%
Unknown 9 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 23%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 14%
Engineering 4 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Other 7 16%
Unknown 11 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 24 September 2023.
All research outputs
#4,238,119
of 25,732,188 outputs
Outputs from JCEM
#3,331
of 15,526 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#74,878
of 342,564 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JCEM
#39
of 126 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,732,188 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,526 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 342,564 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 126 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.