Skip to content

feat(study_index): changes to study index required for rescaled effect computation - #1243

Open
project-defiant wants to merge 4 commits into
rescaled-effect-sizefrom
prevalence
Open

feat(study_index): changes to study index required for rescaled effect computation#1243
project-defiant wants to merge 4 commits into
rescaled-effect-sizefrom
prevalence

Conversation

@project-defiant

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

✨ Context

🛠 What does this PR implement

🙈 Missing

🚦 Before submitting

  • Do these changes cover one single feature (one change at a time)?
  • Did you read the contributor guideline?
  • Did you make sure to update the documentation with your changes?
  • Did you make sure there is no commented out code in this PR?
  • Did you follow conventional commits standards in PR title and commit messages?
  • Did you make sure the branch is up-to-date with the dev branch?
  • Did you write any new necessary tests?
  • Did you make sure the changes pass local tests (make test)?
  • Did you make sure the changes pass pre-commit rules (e.g uv run pre-commit run --all-files)?

@project-defiant
project-defiant changed the base branch from dev to rescaled-effect-size June 22, 2026 20:41
@project-defiant project-defiant changed the title feat(study_index): classification for binary and quant feat(study_index): changes to study index required for rescaled effect computation Jun 22, 2026
@project-defiant
project-defiant requested a review from addramir June 23, 2026 16:02

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is it therapeuticAreaId for each of the diseseIds assaoited with the GWAS?

return self.df.studyType == "gwas"

@staticmethod
def compute_prevalence(n_cases: Column, n_samples: Column, trait_class: Column) -> Column:

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We need a simple check somwhere that checks that n_cases+n_control=n_smaples. Otherwise this formula dosen't work

quantitative rather than binary.
"""

EFO_0001444 = "measurement"

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Very dangerous part - we depend on EFO ontology here. They are going to change all of this in June - it won't work already.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants