A Wolf in Sheep's Clothing: Idealisations and the aims of polygenic scores

IF 1.4 2区 哲学 Q1 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Pub Date : 2023-10-30 DOI:10.1016/j.shpsa.2023.10.006
Davide Serpico
{"title":"A Wolf in Sheep's Clothing: Idealisations and the aims of polygenic scores","authors":"Davide Serpico","doi":"10.1016/j.shpsa.2023.10.006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Research in pharmacogenomics and precision medicine has recently introduced the concept of Polygenic Scores (PGSs), namely, indexes that aggregate the effects that many genetic variants are predicted to have on individual disease risk. The popularity of PGSs is increasing rapidly, but surprisingly little attention has been paid to the idealisations they make about phenotypic development. Indeed, PGSs rely on quantitative genetics models and methods, which involve considerable theoretical assumptions that have been questioned on various grounds. This comes with epistemological and ethical concerns about the use of PGSs in clinical decision-making. In this paper, I investigate to what extent idealisations in genetics models can impact the data gathering and clinical interpretation of genomics findings, particularly the calculation and predictive accuracy of PGSs. Although idealisations are considered ineliminable components of scientific models, they may be legitimate or not depending on the epistemic aims of a model. I thus analyse how various idealisations have been introduced in classical models and progressively readapted throughout the history of genetic theorising. Notably, this process involved important changes in the epistemic purpose of such idealisations, which raises the question of whether they are legitimate in the context of contemporary genomics.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":49467,"journal":{"name":"Studies in History and Philosophy of Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0039368123001449/pdfft?md5=cbc786e005cdab226fb28677a8409938&pid=1-s2.0-S0039368123001449-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in History and Philosophy of Science","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0039368123001449","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Research in pharmacogenomics and precision medicine has recently introduced the concept of Polygenic Scores (PGSs), namely, indexes that aggregate the effects that many genetic variants are predicted to have on individual disease risk. The popularity of PGSs is increasing rapidly, but surprisingly little attention has been paid to the idealisations they make about phenotypic development. Indeed, PGSs rely on quantitative genetics models and methods, which involve considerable theoretical assumptions that have been questioned on various grounds. This comes with epistemological and ethical concerns about the use of PGSs in clinical decision-making. In this paper, I investigate to what extent idealisations in genetics models can impact the data gathering and clinical interpretation of genomics findings, particularly the calculation and predictive accuracy of PGSs. Although idealisations are considered ineliminable components of scientific models, they may be legitimate or not depending on the epistemic aims of a model. I thus analyse how various idealisations have been introduced in classical models and progressively readapted throughout the history of genetic theorising. Notably, this process involved important changes in the epistemic purpose of such idealisations, which raises the question of whether they are legitimate in the context of contemporary genomics.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
披着羊皮的狼:多基因评分的理想化和目标。
药物基因组学和精准医学的研究最近引入了多基因评分(PGSs)的概念,即综合许多基因变异对个体疾病风险的影响的指数。PGSs的受欢迎程度正在迅速增加,但令人惊讶的是,人们很少关注它们对表型发展的理想化。事实上,PGS依赖于定量遗传学模型和方法,其中涉及大量的理论假设,这些假设受到了各种各样的质疑。这与在临床决策中使用PGS的认识论和伦理问题有关。在这篇论文中,我研究了遗传学模型中的理想化在多大程度上会影响基因组学发现的数据收集和临床解释,特别是PGS的计算和预测准确性。尽管理想化被认为是科学模型的不合格组成部分,但它们可能是合法的,也可能不是合法的,这取决于模型的认识目标。因此,我分析了各种理想化是如何在经典模型中引入的,并在遗传理论的整个历史中逐渐重新适应。值得注意的是,这一过程涉及到这种理想化的认识目的的重要变化,这就提出了一个问题,即它们在当代基因组学的背景下是否合法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Studies in History and Philosophy of Science
Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 管理科学-科学史与科学哲学
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
10.00%
发文量
166
审稿时长
6.6 weeks
期刊介绍: Studies in History and Philosophy of Science is devoted to the integrated study of the history, philosophy and sociology of the sciences. The editors encourage contributions both in the long-established areas of the history of the sciences and the philosophy of the sciences and in the topical areas of historiography of the sciences, the sciences in relation to gender, culture and society and the sciences in relation to arts. The Journal is international in scope and content and publishes papers from a wide range of countries and cultural traditions.
期刊最新文献
The philosophical coming of age of science. Euler’s role in Cassirer’s early philosophy of space and time Freud, bullshit, and pseudoscience Kant on the logical form of organized being Gauge invariance through gauge fixing Mathematics and society reunited: The social aspects of Brouwer's intuitionism
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1