4.8 Article

The NHGRI-EBI GWAS Catalog: knowledgebase and deposition resource

期刊

NUCLEIC ACIDS RESEARCH
卷 51, 期 D1, 页码 D977-D985

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkac1010

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The NHGRI-EBIGWAS Catalog is a knowledgebase that provides comprehensive and standardized genome-wide association study (GWAS) data. By updating software, expanding the scope of the database, and increasing community outreach, the catalog has improved the quality and quantity of data, as well as enhanced interoperability with other resources.
The NHGRI-EBIGWAS Catalog (www.ebi.ac.uk/gwas) is a FAIR knowledgebase providing detailed, structured, standardised and interoperable genome-wide association study (GWAS) data to >200 000 users per year from academic research, healthcare and industry. The Catalog contains variant-trait associations and supporting metadata for >45 000 published GWAS across >5000 human traits, and >40 000 full P- value summary statistics datasets. Content is curated from publications or acquired via author submission of prepublication summary statistics through a new submission portal and validation tool. GWAS data volume has vastly increased in recent years. We have updated our software to meet this scaling challenge and to enable rapid release of submitted summary statistics. The scope of the repository has expanded to include additional data types of high interest to the community, including sequencing-based GWAS, gene-based analyses and copy number variation analyses. Commu- nity outreach has increased the number of shared datasets from under-represented traits, e.g. cancer, and we continue to contribute to awareness of the lack of population diversity in GWAS. Interoperability of the Catalog has been enhanced through links to other resources including the Polygenic Score Catalog and the International Mouse Phenotyping Consortium, refinements to GWAS trait annotation, and the development of a standard format for GWAS data.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据