paturley

Hi, Is this just for a single SNP? MTAG results are based on standardized effects, so if you want a fair comparison, you need to compare the estimates after running...

As I said, MTAG effect sizes are in standardized units. That is, it's the effect of a one-allele change in the SNP on the number of standard deviations of the...

I think you should be fine then.

Do you mean the sign has changed? On Thu, Jun 13, 2024, 11:16 AM test12138jooh ***@***.***> wrote: > However，I noticed that some snps effect has also changed. Is it also...

Looking at these standard errors, you have very little information about the true sign before and still pretty limited information afterwards. None of these results are very close to genome...

I don't think so. Your problem is that you are looking at SNPs that are imprecisely estimated in both the GWAS and the MTAG. It is not surprising that a...

You interpret MTAG p-values the same way that you'd interpret GWAS p-values. After a multiple testing correction, you can't reject the null that this SNP has a zero effect. On...

But it really hasn't. Given the magnitude of the SE, the genome-wide significant confidence interval on the initial estimate is beta +/- 5.45 * SE = [-.06, .05] The MTAG...

You can consider the MTAG results consistent with the GWAS results if there aren't statistically significant differences between them. That is not equivalent to being in the confidence interval, but...

I'm confused by your question. MTAG looks for a column that corresponds to the frequency of the effect allele. It looks like the column it has picked out is your...