Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Individual ranking based on polygenic indices is unstable

Polygenic indices (PGIs) are increasingly advocated as screening tools for personalized medicine and education. We find, however, that rankings of individuals in PGI distributions for cardiovascular disease and education created with different construction methods and discovery samples are highly unstable. Hence, current PGIs lack the desired precision to be used routinely for personalized intervention.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Get just this article for as long as you need it


Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Venn diagram depicting the overlap in individuals ranked in the top quintiles of five CVD PGIs.


  1. Torkamani, A., Wineinger, N. E. & Topol, E. J. The personal and clinical utility of polygenic risk scores. Nat. Rev. Genet. 19, 581–590 (2018). A review of existing evidence on personal and clinical benefits of polygenic risk profiling.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Biroli, P. et al. The economics and econometrics of gene-environment interplay. Preprint at (2022). This article discusses the nuances of estimating the interplay between nature and nurture using PGIs.

  3. Aragam, K. G. et al. Limitations of contemporary guidelines for managing patients at high genetic risk of coronary artery disease. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 75, 2769–2780 (2020). This article presents a CVD prediction model that integrates genetic risk.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Wand, H. et al. Improving reporting standards for polygenic scores in risk prediction studies. Nature 591, 211–219 (2021). This study advocates transparent reporting of the construction of PGIs.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Turley, P. et al. Problems with using polygenic scores to select embryos. N. Engl. J. Med. 385, 79–85 (2021). This study critically discusses the use of PGIs for embryo selection.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This is a summary of: Muslimova, D. et al. Rank concordance of polygenic indices. Nat. Hum. Behav. (2023).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Individual ranking based on polygenic indices is unstable. Nat Hum Behav 7, 678–679 (2023).

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI:


Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing