Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Jun 1;6(1):12.
doi: 10.1038/s41539-021-00090-y.

The practical utility of genetic screening in school settings

Affiliations

The practical utility of genetic screening in school settings

J Shero et al. NPJ Sci Learn. .

Abstract

Can genetic screening be used to personalize education for students? Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) screen an individual's DNA for specific variations in their genome, and how said variations relate to specific traits. The variations can then be assigned a corresponding weight and summed to produce polygenic scores (PGS) for given traits. Though first developed for disease risk, PGS is now used to predict educational achievement. Using a novel simulation method, this paper examines if PGS could advance screening in schools, a goal of personalized education. Results show limited potential benefits for using PGS to personalize education for individual students. However, further analysis shows PGS can be effectively used alongside progress monitoring measures to screen for learning disability risk. Altogether, PGS is not useful in personalizing education for every child but has potential utility when used simultaneously with additional screening tools to help determine which children may struggle academically.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1. Trends in positive and negative predictive values of using PGS and progress monitoring as a screener for learning disabilities (tenth percentile cutoff) at varying levels of PGS effectiveness.
This table represents when progress monitoring is correlated with end-of-year achievement at r = 0.55. PPV positive predictive value, NPV negative predictive value.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2. Positive and negative predictive values of using PGS and progress monitoring scores as a screener for learning disabilities (20th percentile cutoff) with varied correlations between PGS and progress monitoring.
This table represents when PGS predicts 10% of end-of-year achievement scorers and progress monitoring is correlated with end-of-year achievement at r = 0.55. PPV positive predictive value; NPV negative predictive value. *Represents the value reported in the article where the relation between PGS and progress monitoring is equal to the relation between PGS and achievement.

References

    1. Wray N, Goddard M, Visscher P. Prediction of individual genetic risk to disease from genome-wide association studies. Genome Res. 2007;17:1520–1528. doi: 10.1101/gr.6665407. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Popejoy AB, Fullerton SM. Genomics is failing on diversity. Nature. 2016;538:161–164. doi: 10.1038/538161a. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Dar-Nimrod I, Heine SJ. Genetic essentialism: on the deceptive determinism of DNA. Psychol. Bull. 2011;137:800–818. doi: 10.1037/a0021860. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Collins FS, Varmus H. A new initiative on precision medicine. N. Engl. J. Med. 2015;372:793–795. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp1500523. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Schwaederle M, et al. Impact of precision medicine in diverse cancers: a meta-analysis of phase II clinical trials. J. Clin. Oncol. 2015;33:3817–3825. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2015.61.5997. - DOI - PMC - PubMed