↓ Skip to main content

Multi-Trait Analysis of GWAS and Biological Insights Into Cognition: A Response to Hill (2018)

Overview of attention for article published in Twin Research & Human Genetics, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
31 Mendeley
citeulike
1 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
Multi-Trait Analysis of GWAS and Biological Insights Into Cognition: A Response to Hill (2018)
Published in
Twin Research & Human Genetics, July 2018
DOI 10.1017/thg.2018.46
Pubmed ID
Authors

Max Lam, Joey W. Trampush, Jin Yu, Emma Knowles, Srdjan Djurovic, Ingrid Melle, Kjetil Sundet, Andrea Christoforou, Ivar Reinvang, Pamela DeRosse, Astri J. Lundervold, Vidar M. Steen, Thomas Espeseth, Katri Räikkönen, Elisabeth Widen, Aarno Palotie, Johan G. Eriksson, Ina Giegling, Bettina Konte, Panos Roussos, Stella Giakoumaki, Katherine E. Burdick, Antony Payton, William Ollier, Ornit Chiba-Falek, Deborah K. Attix, Anna C. Need, Elizabeth T. Cirulli, Aristotle N. Voineskos, Nikos C. Stefanis, Dimitrios Avramopoulos, Alex Hatzimanolis, Dan E. Arking, Nikolaos Smyrnis, Robert M. Bilder, Nelson A. Freimer, Tyrone D. Cannon, Edythe London, Russell A. Poldrack, Fred W. Sabb, Eliza Congdon, Emily Drabant Conley, Matthew A. Scult, Dwight Dickinson, Richard E. Straub, Gary Donohoe, Derek Morris, Aiden Corvin, Michael Gill, Ahmad R. Hariri, Daniel R. Weinberger, Neil Pendleton, Panos Bitsios, Dan Rujescu, Jari Lahti, Stephanie Le Hellard, Matthew C. Keller, Ole A. Andreassen, David C. Glahn, Anil K. Malhotra, Todd Lencz

Abstract

Hill (Twin Research and Human Genetics, Vol. 21, 2018, 84-88) presented a critique of our recently published paper in Cell Reports entitled 'Large-Scale Cognitive GWAS Meta-Analysis Reveals Tissue-Specific Neural Expression and Potential Nootropic Drug Targets' (Lam et al., Cell Reports, Vol. 21, 2017, 2597-2613). Specifically, Hill offered several interrelated comments suggesting potential problems with our use of a new analytic method called Multi-Trait Analysis of GWAS (MTAG) (Turley et al., Nature Genetics, Vol. 50, 2018, 229-237). In this brief article, we respond to each of these concerns. Using empirical data, we conclude that our MTAG results do not suffer from 'inflation in the FDR [false discovery rate]', as suggested by Hill (Twin Research and Human Genetics, Vol. 21, 2018, 84-88), and are not 'more relevant to the genetic contributions to education than they are to the genetic contributions to intelligence'.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 31 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 4 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 10%
Student > Master 3 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 10%
Other 5 16%
Unknown 10 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 7 23%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 10%
Neuroscience 3 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 10%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 9 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 30 July 2018.
All research outputs
#20,688,303
of 25,411,814 outputs
Outputs from Twin Research & Human Genetics
#613
of 761 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#264,932
of 340,170 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Twin Research & Human Genetics
#11
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,411,814 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 761 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.8. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 340,170 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.