↓ Skip to main content

Estimating Effect Sizes and Expected Replication Probabilities from GWAS Summary Statistics

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Genetics, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (51st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (56th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Readers on

mendeley
101 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
Estimating Effect Sizes and Expected Replication Probabilities from GWAS Summary Statistics
Published in
Frontiers in Genetics, February 2016
DOI 10.3389/fgene.2016.00015
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dominic Holland, Yunpeng Wang, Wesley K. Thompson, Andrew Schork, Chi-Hua Chen, Min-Tzu Lo, Aree Witoelar, Schizophrenia Working Group of the Psychiatric Genomics Consortium, Enhancing Neuro Imaging Genetics through Meta Analysis Consortium, Thomas Werge, Michael O'Donovan, Ole A. Andreassen, Anders M. Dale

Abstract

Genome-wide Association Studies (GWAS) result in millions of summary statistics ("z-scores") for single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) associations with phenotypes. These rich datasets afford deep insights into the nature and extent of genetic contributions to complex phenotypes such as psychiatric disorders, which are understood to have substantial genetic components that arise from very large numbers of SNPs. The complexity of the datasets, however, poses a significant challenge to maximizing their utility. This is reflected in a need for better understanding the landscape of z-scores, as such knowledge would enhance causal SNP and gene discovery, help elucidate mechanistic pathways, and inform future study design. Here we present a parsimonious methodology for modeling effect sizes and replication probabilities, relying only on summary statistics from GWAS substudies, and a scheme allowing for direct empirical validation. We show that modeling z-scores as a mixture of Gaussians is conceptually appropriate, in particular taking into account ubiquitous non-null effects that are likely in the datasets due to weak linkage disequilibrium with causal SNPs. The four-parameter model allows for estimating the degree of polygenicity of the phenotype and predicting the proportion of chip heritability explainable by genome-wide significant SNPs in future studies with larger sample sizes. We apply the model to recent GWAS of schizophrenia (N = 82,315) and putamen volume (N = 12,596), with approximately 9.3 million SNP z-scores in both cases. We show that, over a broad range of z-scores and sample sizes, the model accurately predicts expectation estimates of true effect sizes and replication probabilities in multistage GWAS designs. We assess the degree to which effect sizes are over-estimated when based on linear-regression association coefficients. We estimate the polygenicity of schizophrenia to be 0.037 and the putamen to be 0.001, while the respective sample sizes required to approach fully explaining the chip heritability are 10(6) and 10(5). The model can be extended to incorporate prior knowledge such as pleiotropy and SNP annotation. The current findings suggest that the model is applicable to a broad array of complex phenotypes and will enhance understanding of their genetic architectures.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 101 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 99 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 20%
Researcher 18 18%
Student > Master 17 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 9%
Professor 8 8%
Other 13 13%
Unknown 16 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 21 21%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 19 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 11%
Psychology 7 7%
Neuroscience 7 7%
Other 16 16%
Unknown 20 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 01 March 2016.
All research outputs
#14,796,718
of 25,196,456 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Genetics
#3,332
of 13,563 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#145,900
of 303,774 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Genetics
#25
of 58 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,196,456 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,563 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 303,774 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 58 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 56% of its contemporaries.