Abstract
<jats:title>ABSTRACT</jats:title> <jats:p> Non-random participation in genetic studies can bias associations between genetic variants and outcomes. Existing methods to detect ascertainment bias often require individual-level data, thus limiting their broad applicability. Here, we introduce a summary-statistics-based method to detect and quantify ascertainment bias in large-scale genetic studies. Our method estimates a parameter, <jats:italic>θ</jats:italic> , which captures deviations in the mean polygenic score (PGS) of an ascertained sample relative to its expectation across non-ascertained or differentially ascertained references. We show through extensive simulations that our method is robust to population stratification and reference misspecification unlike naive mean PGS comparison. When applied to 21 traits across 11 large-scale biobanks, our method recapitulates known patterns of ascertainment and detects new evidence of ascertainment on genetic susceptibility to depression, height and blood pressure in many biobanks. Overall, our framework enables systematic assessment of ascertainment directly from summary statistics and provides a scalable tool for evaluating representativeness in large scale genetic studies. </jats:p>