ArticleHuman heredity2005
Multilocus linkage analysis of affected sib pairs.
Article in Human heredity, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe conventional affected sib pair methods evaluate the linkage information at a locus by considering only marginal information. We describe a multilocus linkage method that uses both the marginal information and information derived from the possible interactions among several disease loci, thereby increasing the significance of loci with modest effects.
methodsOur method is based on a statistic that quantifies the linkage information contained in a set of markers. By a marker selection-reduction process, we screen a set of polymorphisms and select a few that seem linked to disease.
resultsWe test our approach on genome scan data for inflammatory bowel disease (InfBD) and on simulated data. On real data we detect 6 of the 8 known InfBD loci; on simulated data we obtain improvements in power of up to 40% compared to a conventional single-locus method.
conclusionOur extensive simulations and the results on real data show that our method is in general more powerful than single-locus methods in detecting disease loci responsible for complex traits. A further advantage of our approach is that it can be extended to make use of both the linkage and the linkage disequilibrium between disease loci and nearby markers.
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.