Back

The (mis-)alignment of genetic association studies to global health needs

Alolayet, R.; Chong, A. H.; Aldridge, R. W.; Davey Smith, G.; Hemani, G.; Walker, J. G.

2026-02-11 public and global health
10.64898/2026.02.09.26345919 medRxiv
Show abstract

Health research priorities are generally not aligned with global disease burden. Although genome-wide association studies (GWAS) are correcting a historical bias by including samples from different demographic groups, this does not necessarily translate to improved understanding of the most important causes of disease globally. We demonstrate that while in countries with high socioeconomic development index (SDI) there is some alignment between the traits being analysed in GWAS and those that contribute most to disease burden, there is almost no such alignment in countries with low SDI. Improvement in alignment between GWAS and disease burden has been seen for countries with middle SDI over time, likely due to the contributions to disease burden changing in those regions rather than GWAS responding to the needs of those regions. Low GWAS alignment with disease burden may be partially explained by lower GWAS attention to childhood health. Improving aetiological understanding of high burden neglected conditions should be a priority for emerging biobanks in order to reduce global health inequality. Short abstractWe identify some alignment between the traits being analysed in genome-wide association studies (GWAS) and disease burden in high socioeconomic development index (SDI) countries, while there is almost no such alignment in countries with low SDI, mostly due to neglecting childhood infection. Improvement in alignment between GWAS and disease burden has been seen for countries with middle SDI over time likely due to changing disease burden.

Matching journals

The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 3%
12.5%
2
Wellcome Open Research
57 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
10.1%
3
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 25%
6.8%
4
International Journal of Infectious Diseases
126 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
4.9%
5
BMC Public Health
147 papers in training set
Top 1%
4.2%
6
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 1%
4.0%
7
International Journal of Epidemiology
74 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
4.0%
8
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 36%
3.6%
50% of probability mass above
9
Frontiers in Public Health
140 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.6%
10
Social Science & Medicine
15 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.6%
11
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2130 papers in training set
Top 20%
3.6%
12
BMJ Global Health
98 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.7%
13
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 8%
1.9%
14
PLOS Global Public Health
293 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.9%
15
F1000Research
79 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.9%
16
Life Science Alliance
263 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.9%
17
The Lancet Global Health
24 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.7%
18
iScience
1063 papers in training set
Top 16%
1.7%
19
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 53%
1.5%
20
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 18%
1.5%
21
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B
51 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.2%
22
PLOS Digital Health
91 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
23
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
53 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.9%
24
Royal Society Open Science
193 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
25
Epidemiology and Infection
84 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.7%
26
EClinicalMedicine
21 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%
27
Cell Genomics
162 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.6%