ArticleAnnals of human genetics2005
Family-based association tests for different family structures using pooled DNA.
Article in Annals of human genetics, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Disentangling pooled triad genotypes for association studies.Annals of human genetics · 2014Article
- Association studies using family pools of outcrossing crops based on allele-frequency estimates from DNA sequencing.TAG. Theoretical and applied genetics. Theoretische und angewandte Genetik · 2014Article
- Multimarker analysis and imputation of multiple platform pooling-based genome-wide association studies.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2008Article
- Fractioned DNA pooling: a new cost-effective strategy for fine mapping of quantitative trait loci.Genetics · 2007Article
- Two-stage designs in case-control association analysis.Genetics · 2006Article
- A genome-wide study of preferential amplification/hybridization in microarray-based pooled DNA experiments.Nucleic acids research · 2006Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
DNA pooling is a cost-effective strategy for genomewise association studies to identify disease genes. In the context of family-based association studies, Risch & Teng (1998) mainly considered families of identical structures to detect associations between genetic markers and disease, and suggested possible approaches to incorporating different family types without a thorough study of their properties. However, families collected in real genetic studies often have different structures and, more importantly, the informativeness of each family structure depends on the disease model which is generally unknown. So there is a need to develop and investigate statistical methods to combine information from diverse family types. In this article, we propose a general strategy to incorporate different family types by assigning each family an "optimal" weight in association tests. In addition, we consider measurement errors in our analysis. When we evaluate our approach under different disease models and measurement errors, we find that our weighting scheme may lead to a substantial reduction in sample size required over the approach suggested by Risch & Teng (1998), and measurement errors may have significant impact on the required sample size when the error rates are not negligible.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.