The molecular genetics of participation in the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children
Amy E. TayloriD, Hannah J JonesiD, Hannah SallisiD, Jack EuesdeniD, Evie StergiakouliiD, Neil M DaviesiD, Stanley ZammitiD, Debbie A. LawloriD, Marcus Robert MunafoiD, George Davey SmithiD, Kate M. TillingiD
Abstract
BackgroundIt is often assumed that selection (including participation and dropout) does not represent an important source of bias in genetic studies. However, there is little evidence to date on the effect of genetic factors on participation.\n\nMethodsUsing data on mothers (N=7,486) and children (N=7,508) from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children, we 1) examined the association of polygenic risk scores for a range of socio-demographic, lifestyle characteristics and health conditions related to continued participation, 2) investigated whether associations of polygenic scores with body mass index (BMI; derived from self-reported weight and height) and self-reported smoking differed in the largest sample with genetic data and a sub-sample who participated in a recent follow-up and 3) determined the proportion of variation in participation explained by common genetic variants using genome-wide data.\n\nResultsWe found evidence that polygenic scores for higher education, agreeableness and openness were associated with higher participation and polygenic scores for smoking initiation, higher BMI, neuroticism, schizophrenia, ADHD and depression were associated with lower participation. Associations between the polygenic score for education and self-reported smoking differed between the largest sample with genetic data (OR for ever smoking per SD increase in polygenic score:0.85, 95% CI:0.81,0.89) and sub-sample (OR:0.95, 95% CI:0.88,1.02). In genome-wide analysis, single nucleotide polymorphism based heritability explained 17-31% of variability in participation.\n\nConclusionsGenetic association studies, including Mendelian randomization, can be biased by selection, including loss to follow-up. Genetic risk for dropout should be considered in all analyses of studies with selective participation.
02 /Specification & Classification
Click any tag to browse matching papers- Citations
- 192
- FWCI
- 12.22
- Field percentile
- top 1%
- Organism
- Assay
- Research Focus
- Approach
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- The Genetics of Participation: Method and Analysis
Stefania Benónísdóttir, Augustine Kong·Nature GeneticsPeer-reviewed·Jul 13, 2023
- Genetic predictors of participation in optional components of UK Biobank
Jessica Tyrrell, Jie Zheng, … Kate M. Tilling·Nature CommunicationsPeer-reviewed·Feb 9, 2021
- Factors associated with sharing email information and mental health survey participation in two large population cohorts
Mark J. Adams, William David Hill, … Andrew Mark McIntosh·International Journal of EpidemiologyPeer-reviewed·Jun 17, 2019
- Correction for participation bias in the UK Biobank reveals non-negligible impact on genetic associations and downstream analyses
Tabea Schoeler, Doug Speed, … Zoltán Kutalik·Nature Human BehaviourPeer-reviewed·Apr 27, 2023
- The impact of assortative mating, participation bias, and socioeconomic status on the polygenic risk of behavioral and psychiatric traits
Brenda Cabrera‐Mendoza, Frank R. Wendt, … Renato A Polimanti·medRxiv·Nov 29, 2022
- Mortality Selection in a Genetic Sample and Implications for Association Studies
Benjamin W Domingue, Daniel W Belsky, … Jason Boardman·International Journal of EpidemiologyPeer-reviewed·Apr 11, 2017