You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
As with effect statistic (beta, odds_ratio, hazard_ratio), could define the p value type (standard or -log10) in the field label itself instead of, or as well as, in the metadata. This would be consistent with the effect statistic handling and also allows users to interpret the data without reading the metadata file.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Another reason why separating sumstats from metadata in two different files is a weakness of the GWAS-SSF format in my opinion (in contrast to GWAS-VCF for example), particularly as it pertains to data integrity and self-contained documentation.
As with effect statistic (beta, odds_ratio, hazard_ratio), could define the p value type (standard or -log10) in the field label itself instead of, or as well as, in the metadata. This would be consistent with the effect statistic handling and also allows users to interpret the data without reading the metadata file.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: