Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 13, 2025

Large-Scale Multi-Omics Genome-Wide Association Studies Mo-GWAS: Guidelines for Sample Preparation and Normalization
Published on: July 27, 2021
Testing for differences in polygenic scores in the presence of confounding
Jennifer Blanc1, Jeremy J Berg1
1Department of Human Genetics, University of Chicago, 920 E 58th St CLSC, Chicago, IL 60637, USA.
None:
Polygenic scores have become an important tool in human genetics, enabling the prediction of individuals' phenotypes from their genotypes. Understanding how the pattern of differences in polygenic score predictions across individuals intersects with variation in ancestry can provide insights into the evolutionary forces acting on the trait in question and is important for understanding health disparities. However, because most polygenic scores are computed using effect estimates from population samples, they are susceptible to confounding by both genetic and environmental effects that are correlated with ancestry. The extent to which this confounding drives patterns in the distribution of polygenic scores depends on the patterns of population structure in both the original estimation panel and in the prediction/test panel. Here, we use theory from population and statistical genetics, together with simulations, to study the procedure of testing for an association between polygenic scores and axes of ancestry variation in the presence of confounding. We use a general model of genetic relatedness to describe how confounding in the estimation panel biases the distribution of polygenic scores in ways that depends on the degree of overlap in population structure between panels. We then show how this confounding can bias tests for associations between polygenic scores and important axes of ancestry variation in the test panel. Specifically, for any given test, there exists a single axis of population structure in the genome-wide association study (GWAS) panel that needs to be controlled for in order to protect the test. In the context of this result, we study the behavior of multiple approaches to control for stratification along this axis, including standard methods such using principal components as fixed covariates in the GWAS, linear mixed models, and a novel approach for directly estimating the axis using the test panel genotypes. Our analyses highlight the role of estimation noise in the models of population structure as a plausible source of residual confounding in polygenic score analyses.
More Related Videos
09:38Generalized Psychophysiological Interaction PPI Analysis of Memory Related Connectivity in Individuals at Genetic Risk for Alzheimer's Disease
Published on: November 14, 2017
06:52Using Cholesky Decomposition to Explore Individual Differences in Longitudinal Relations between Reading Skills
Published on: September 17, 2019
Related Concept Videos
Confounding in Epidemiological Studies
Strategies for Assessing and Addressing Confounding
Confounding can be addressed at both the design phase of a study and through analytical methods after data...
Pleiotropy
Human Genetics
The complex relationship between genetics and psychology is observable through common biological components such...
Genome-wide Association Studies-GWAS
GWAS does not require the identification of the target gene involved in...
Comparing Copy Number Variations and SNPs
Copy number variations or CNVs are the structural variations that cover more than 1kb of DNA sequence. The single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP), on the other hand, is a single nucleotide change or a point mutation that is found in more than 1%...