Polygenic scores (PGS) are increasingly being used for prediction of social and behavioral traits, but suffer from many methodological, theoretical, and ethical concerns that profoundly limit their value. Primarily, these scores are derived from statistical correlations, carrying no inherent biological meaning, and thus may capture indirect effects. Further, the performance of these scores depends upon the diversity of the reference populations and the genomic panels from which they were derived, which consistently underrepresent minoritized populations, leading to poor fit when applied to diverse groups. There is also inherent danger of eugenic applications for the information gained from these scores, and general risk of misunderstandings that could lead to stigmatization for underrepresented groups. We urge extreme caution in use of PGS particularly for social/behavioral outcomes fraught for misinterpretation, with potential harm for the minoritized groups least likely to benefit from their use.

多基因评分 (PGS) 越来越多地用于预测社会和行为特征，但受到许多方法论、理论和伦理问题的困扰，严重限制了其价值。主要是，这些分数来自统计相关性，不具有固有的生物学意义，因此可能捕捉到间接影响。此外，这些分数的表现取决于参考群体和它们所源自的基因组组的多样性，这些分数始终未能充分代表少数群体，导致应用于不同群体时拟合效果不佳。从这些分数中获得的信息的优生应用也存在固有的危险，以及可能导致代表性不足的群体遭受耻辱的普遍误解风险。我们敦促在使用 PGS 时要格外谨慎，特别是对于充满误解的社会/行为结果，这可能会对最不可能从其使用中受益的少数群体造成潜在伤害。