The DOI matches its Crossref record; 45 of the 45 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Participation bias in the UK Biobank distorts genetic associations and downstream analyses
Open accessAbstract
While volunteer-based studies such as the UK Biobank have become the cornerstone of genetic epidemiology, the participating individuals are rarely representative of their target population. To evaluate the impact of selective participation, here we derived UK Biobank participation probabilities on the basis of 14 variables harmonized across the UK Biobank and a representative sample. We then conducted weighted genome-wide association analyses on 19 traits. Comparing the output from weighted genome-wide association analyses ( n effective = 94,643 to 102,215) with that from standard genome-wide association analyses ( n = 263,464 to 283,749), we found that increasing representativeness led to changes in SNP effect sizes and identified novel SNP associations for 12 traits. While heritability estimates were less impacted by weighting (maximum change in h 2 , 5%), we found substantial discrepancies for genetic correlations (maximum change in r g , 0.31) and Mendelian randomization estimates (maximum change in β STD , 0.15) for socio-behavioural traits. We urge the field to increase representativeness in biobank samples, especially when studying genetic correlates of behaviour, lifestyles and social outcomes.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
1 retracted
Davis, K. A. S., Coleman, J. R. I., Adams, M., Allen, N., Breen, G., Cullen, B., Dickens, C., Fox, E., Graham, N., Holliday, J., et al. (2018) · BJPsych Open · doi:10.1192/bjo.2018.12 · Cited by 236
RetractedThe central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects
ROSENBAUM, P. R., & RUBIN, D. B. (1983) · Biometrika · doi:10.1093/biomet/70.1.41 · Cited by 31,241
Sudlow, C., Gallacher, J., Allen, N., Beral, V., Burton, P., Danesh, J., Downey, P., Elliott, P., Green, J., Landray, M., et al. (2015) · PLOS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1001779 · Cited by 12,728
An integrated map of genetic variation from 1,092 human genomes
The 1000 Genomes Project Consortium (2012) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature11632 · Cited by 7,711
LD Score regression distinguishes confounding from polygenicity in genome-wide association studies
Schizophrenia Working Group of the Psychiatric Genomics Consortium, Bulik-Sullivan, B. K., Loh, P.-R., Finucane, H. K., Ripke, S., Yang, J., Patterson, N., Daly, M. J., Price, A. L., & Neale, B. M. (2015) · Nature Genetics · doi:10.1038/ng.3211 · Cited by 5,559
Fry, A., Littlejohns, T. J., Sudlow, C., Doherty, N., Adamska, L., Sprosen, T., Collins, R., & Allen, N. E. (2017) · American Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/aje/kwx246 · Cited by 3,979
Integration of summary data from GWAS and eQTL studies predicts complex trait gene targets
Zhu, Z., Zhang, F., Hu, H., Bakshi, A., Robinson, M. R., Powell, J. E., Montgomery, G. W., Goddard, M. E., Wray, N. R., Visscher, P. M., et al. (2016) · Nature Genetics · doi:10.1038/ng.3538 · Cited by 3,352
A structural approach to selection bias
Hernán, M. A., Hernández-Díaz, S., & Robins, J. M. (2004) · Epidemiology · doi:10.1097/01.ede.0000135174.63482.43 · Cited by 2,844
PhenoScanner V2: an expanded tool for searching human genotype–phenotype associations
Kamat, M. A., Blackshaw, J. A., Young, R., Surendran, P., Burgess, S., Danesh, J., Butterworth, A. S., & Staley, J. R. (2019) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btz469 · Cited by 2,155
Estimating Missing Heritability for Disease from Genome-wide Association Studies
Lee, S. H., Wray, N. R., Goddard, M. E., & Visscher, P. M. (2011) · The American Journal of Human Genetics · doi:10.1016/j.ajhg.2011.02.002 · Cited by 1,064
Cited by
Guidelines for performing Mendelian randomization investigations: update for summer 2023
Burgess, S., Davey Smith, G., Davies, N. M., Dudbridge, F., Gill, D., Glymour, M. M., Hartwig, F. P., Kutalik, Z., Holmes, M. V., Minelli, C., et al. (2023) · Wellcome Open Research · doi:10.12688/wellcomeopenres.15555.3 · Cited by 721
Self-citationTiming of lifespan influences on brain and cognition
Walhovd, K. B., Lövden, M., & Fjell, A. M. (2023) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2023.07.001 · Cited by 112
Wu, Y., Sun, Z., Zheng, Q., Miao, J., Dorn, S., Mukherjee, S., Fletcher, J. M., & Lu, Q. (2024) · Nature Genetics · doi:10.1038/s41588-024-01963-9 · Cited by 45
Kristensen, F. P. B., Sanchez-Lastra, M. A., Dalene, K. E., del Pozo Cruz, B., Ried-Larsen, M., Thomsen, R. W., Ding, D., Ekelund, U., & Tarp, J. (2023) · Diabetes Care · doi:10.2337/dc23-0937 · Cited by 29
Liang, Y., Luo, S., Bell, S., Mo, J. M. Y., He, B., Zhou, Y., Bai, X., & Au Yeung, S. L. (2024) · BMC Medicine · doi:10.1186/s12916-024-03486-w · Cited by 8
Metadata
- Authors
- Schoeler, T., Speed, D., Porcu, E., Pirastu, N., Pingault, J.-B., & Kutalik, Z.
- Venue
- Nature Human Behaviour
- Published
- 2023-04-27
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 1216-1227
- ISSN
- 2397-3374 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4367294547
- Cited by
- 404
- References
- 45
- FWCI
- 59.48
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Participation bias in the UK Biobank distorts genetic associations and downstream analyses. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1038/s41562-023-01579-9
- The paper
- Schoeler, T., Speed, D., Porcu, E., Pirastu, N., Pingault, J.-B., & Kutalik, Z. (2023). Participation bias in the UK Biobank distorts genetic associations and downstream analyses. Nature Human Behaviour. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-023-01579-9
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
