Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
PreprintCited by 623

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 43 of the 43 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Genome-wide genetic data on ~500,000 UK Biobank participants

Open access
Bycroft, Clare, Freeman, Colin, Petkova, Desislava, Band, Gavin, Elliott, Lloyd T., Sharp, Kevin, Motyer, Allan, Vukcevic, Damjan, Delaneau, Olivier, O’Connell, Jared, Cortes, Adrian, Welsh, Samantha, McVean, Gil, Leslie, Stephen, Donnelly, Peter, Marchini, Jonathan·2017·bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)

Abstract

The UK Biobank project is a large prospective cohort study of ~500,000 individuals from across the United Kingdom, aged between 40-69 at recruitment. A rich variety of phenotypic and health-related information is available on each participant, making the resource unprecedented in its size and scope. Here we describe the genome-wide genotype data (~805,000 markers) collected on all individuals in the cohort and its quality control procedures. Genotype data on this scale offers novel opportunities for assessing quality issues, although the wide range of ancestries of the individuals in the cohort also creates particular challenges. We also conducted a set of analyses that reveal properties of the genetic data – such as population structure and relatedness – that can be important for downstream analyses. In addition, we phased and imputed genotypes into the dataset, using computationally efficient methods combined with the Haplotype Reference Consortium (HRC) and UK10K haplotype resource. This increases the number of testable variants by over 100-fold to ~96 million variants. We also imputed classical allelic variation at 11 human leukocyte antigen (HLA) genes, and as a quality control check of this imputation, we replicate signals of known associations between HLA alleles and many common diseases. We describe tools that allow efficient genome-wide association studies (GWAS) of multiple traits and fast phenome-wide association studies (PheWAS), which work together with a new compressed file format that has been used to distribute the dataset. As a further check of the genotyped and imputed datasets, we performed a test-case genome-wide association scan on a well-studied human trait, standing height.

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 · 10.1101/166298

Cites

43 of 43 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

Show all 43 references

Cited by

See all 623

Metadata

Authors
Bycroft, C., Freeman, C., Petkova, D., Band, G., Elliott, L. T., Sharp, K., Motyer, A., Vukcevic, D., Delaneau, O., O’Connell, J., Cortes, A., Welsh, S., McVean, G., Leslie, S., Donnelly, P., & Marchini, J.
Venue
bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)
Publisher
openRxiv
Published
2017-07-20
OpenAlex
W2737435306
Cited by
623
References
43
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
green

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: Genome-wide genetic data on ~500,000 UK Biobank participants. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1101/166298
The paper
Bycroft, C., Freeman, C., Petkova, D., Band, G., Elliott, L. T., Sharp, K., Motyer, A., Vukcevic, D., Delaneau, O., O’Connell, J., Cortes, A., Welsh, S., McVean, G., Leslie, S., Donnelly, P., & Marchini, J. (2017). Genome-wide genetic data on ~500,000 UK Biobank participants. bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory). https://doi.org/10.1101/166298

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.