↓ Skip to main content

Genome–wide association study for risk taking propensity indicates shared pathways with body mass index

Overview of attention for article published in Communications Biology, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

1 news outlet
19 tweeters
5 Google+ users
1 Redditor


2 Dimensions

Readers on

38 Mendeley
Genome–wide association study for risk taking propensity indicates shared pathways with body mass index
Published in
Communications Biology, May 2018
DOI 10.1038/s42003-018-0042-6
Pubmed ID

Emma A. D. Clifton, John R. B. Perry, Fumiaki Imamura, Luca A. Lotta, Soren Brage, Nita G. Forouhi, Simon J. Griffin, Nicholas J. Wareham, Ken K. Ong, Felix R. Day


Risk-taking propensity is a trait of significant public health relevance but few specific genetic factors are known. Here we perform a genome-wide association study of self-reported risk-taking propensity among 436,236 white European UK Biobank study participants. We identify genome-wide associations at 26 loci (P < 5 × 10-8), 24 of which are novel, implicating genes enriched in the GABA and GABA receptor pathways. Modelling the relationship between risk-taking propensity and body mass index (BMI) using Mendelian randomisation shows a positive association (0.25 approximate SDs of BMI (SE: 0.06); P = 6.7 × 10-5). The impact of individual SNPs is heterogeneous, indicating a complex relationship arising from multiple shared pathways. We identify positive genetic correlations between risk-taking and waist-hip ratio, childhood obesity, ever smoking, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, bipolar disorder and schizophrenia, alongside a negative correlation with women's age at first birth. These findings highlight that behavioural pathways involved in risk-taking propensity may play a role in obesity, smoking and psychiatric disorders.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 19 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 38 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 8 21%
Researcher 8 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 18%
Student > Master 4 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 11%
Other 7 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Unspecified 11 29%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 13%
Psychology 4 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 5%
Other 8 21%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 24. 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 07 December 2018.
All research outputs
of 13,702,549 outputs
Outputs from Communications Biology
of 591 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 269,756 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Communications Biology
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,702,549 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 591 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% 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 269,756 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them