Cited by 287Genetic Associations and EpidemiologyGenetic and phenotypic traits in livestockGenetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and Animals

Adjusting for Heritable Covariates Can Bias Effect Estimates in Genome-Wide Association Studies

Open access
Aschard, Hugues, Vilhjálmsson, Bjarni J., Joshi, Amit D., Price, Alkes L., Kraft, Peter·2015·The American Journal of Human Genetics

Abstract

In recent years, a number of large-scale genome-wide association studies have been published for human traits adjusted for other correlated traits with a genetic basis. In most studies, the motivation for such an adjustment is to discover genetic variants associated with the primary outcome independently of the correlated trait. In this report, we contend that this objective is fulfilled when the tested variants have no effect on the covariate or when the correlation between the covariate and the outcome is fully explained by a direct effect of the covariate on the outcome. For all other scenarios, an unintended bias is introduced with respect to the primary outcome as a result of the adjustment, and this bias might lead to false positives. Here, we illustrate this point by providing examples from published genome-wide association studies, including large meta-analysis of waist-to-hip ratio and waist circumference adjusted for body mass index (BMI), where genetic effects might be biased as a result of adjustment for body mass index. Using both theory and simulations, we explore this phenomenon in detail and discuss the ramifications for future genome-wide association studies of correlated traits and diseases.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ajhg.2014.12.021

Cites

38 of 38 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 40 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Aschard, H., Vilhjálmsson, B. J., Joshi, A. D., Price, A. L., & Kraft, P.
Affiliations
Harvard University (US)
Corresponding author
Aschard, Hugues
Venue
The American Journal of Human Genetics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-02
Volume
96
Issue
2
Pages
329-339
ISSN
0002-9297 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1996682563
Cited by
287
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 16 · 2025: 25 · 2024: 30 · 2023: 27 · 2022: 30 · 2021: 33 · 2020: 26 · 2019: 24 · 2018: 26 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 22 · 2015: 8
FWCI
17.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The American Journal of Human Genetics (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Human Genome Research Institute (R03HG006720)
  • National Cancer Institute (U19CA148065)
  • National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (R21ES020754)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Associations and Epidemiology
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic and phenotypic traits in livestock
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and Animals
Keywords
genome-wide association study, correlated traits, false positives, waist-to-hip ratio, waist circumference, body mass index, confounding
MeSH terms
Computer Simulation, Humans, Models, Genetic, Genetic Variation, Body Mass Index, Quantitative Trait, Heritable, Waist-Hip Ratio, Waist Circumference, Genome-Wide Association Study

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review