Cited by 1Genetic Associations and EpidemiologyGenetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and AnimalsForensic and Genetic Research

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 38 of the 38 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Multiancestry conditional and joint analysis applied to GWAS summary statistics

Open access
Wang, Xiaotong, Wang, Yong, Yang, Jian, Visscher, Peter M., Wray, Naomi R., Yengo, Loic·2026·Nature Genetics

Abstract

Conditional and joint (COJO) analysis of genome-wide association study (GWAS) data is a standard post-GWAS analysis for identifying statistically independent associations. Although GWAS meta-analyses are increasingly conducted across multiple ancestry groups, the optimal strategy for multiancestry COJO analysis remains unclear. Here we introduce Manc-COJO, a method for multiancestry COJO analysis. Simulations and real-data analyses show that Manc-COJO improves detection of independent association signals while reducing false positives compared with single-ancestry COJO implemented in genome-wide complex trait analysis (GCTA) and its ad-hoc multiancestry adaptations. We also introduce Manc-COJO:FIX, a follow-up algorithm to identify ancestry-specific independent associations. The C++ implementation of Manc-COJO is over 120-fold faster than GCTA-COJO and supports linkage disequilibrium references derived from either individual-level genotype data or pre-computed matrices, facilitating analyses when data sharing is limited.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41588-026-02799-1

Cites

38 of 38 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Still being checked.

Metadata

Authors
Wang, X., Wang, Y., Yang, J., Visscher, P. M., Wray, N. R., & Yengo, L.
Affiliations
  • University of Oxford (GB)
  • Westlake University (CN)
  • The University of Queensland (AU)
Corresponding author
Wang, Xiaotong
Venue
Nature Genetics
Published
2026-10-20
ISSN
  • 1061-4036 (ISSN-L)
  • 1546-1718
OpenAlex
W7172541009
Cited by
1
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 1
FWCI
4.05
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Genetics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) (cc-by)
Funders
  • University of Oxford
  • Danmarks Grundforskningsfond
  • Snow Medical
  • European Research Council
  • Australian Research Council (FL180100072, FT220100069)
  • National Health and Medical Research Council (1173790)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Associations and Epidemiology
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and Animals
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Forensic and Genetic Research
Keywords
false positive reduction, genetic association testing, software package

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