Back

Multiple Measures Reveal The Value of Both Race And Geographic Ancestry For Self-Identification

Damotte, V.; Zhao, C.; Lin, C.; Williams, E.; Louzoun, Y.; Madbouly, A.; Kotlarz, R.; McDaniel, M.; Norman, P. J.; Lizee, A.; Myres, N. M.; Ball, C. A.; Chahine, K. G.; Byrnes, J.; Wang, Y.; Maiers, M.; Hollenbach, J. A.

2019-07-13 genetics
10.1101/701698 bioRxiv
Show abstract

There is long-standing tension regarding whether and how to use race or geographic ancestry in biomedical research. We examined multiple self-reported measures of race and ancestry from a cohort of over 100,000 U.S. residents alongside genetic data. We found that these measures are often non-overlapping, and that no single self-reported measure alone provides a better fit to genetic ancestry than a combination including both race and geographic ancestry. We also found that patterns of reporting for race and ancestry appear to be influenced by participation in direct-to-consumer genetic ancestry testing. Our results demonstrate that there is a place for the language of both race and geographic ancestry as we seek to empower individuals to fully describe their family history in research and medicine.\n\nOne Sentence SummarySelf-identification in the United States according to both racial and geographic terms best reflects genetic ancestry in individuals.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.