“The genes can set the rules, but the outcome will vary ... This is especially true in the brain, due to the nonlinear, self-organizing nature of development, where small differences at one stage can have cascading consequences & be amplified across devo.”https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/is-our-future-really-written-in-our-genes/ …
-
What is the PGS measurement error? I don't think people report it, and it might not be calculable. What is the likely measurement error of taking a weighted sum of thousands to 100s of thousands of regression coefficients?
It's very small and usually not reported because studies only measure them once. However, @razibkhan could calculate some for you because he did multiple array tests on himself. It will be close to the genotyping accuracy which is usually >0.99.
-
-
I don't think you can see it as technical error alone. These scores measure association with a phenotype, not just genotypes. Genotypes are random variables, but so are each of the thousands of individual weights (the GWAS coefficients)
-
That's what Plomin meant I think. You're now talking about the estimation error in the PGS model. That's a different issue all together and Plomin did obviously not mean our current PGS models are perfect (capture 100% heritability).
-
Well, I'm not talking about prediction error. I think we are looking at PGS from different angles, or with definitions that are too fuzzy. Twitter ain't great for ironing out this sort of disagreement..
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.