Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16451608›Full record

ArticleBMC genetics2005

Searching for epistatic interactions in nuclear families using conditional linkage analysis.

Svati H Shah, Michael A Schmidt, Hao Mei, William K Scott, Elizabeth R Hauser, Silke Schmidt

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC genetics, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 31% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Svati H ShahCenter for Human Genetics, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA. shah0029@mc.duke.edu
Michael A Schmidt
Hao Mei
William K Scott
Elizabeth R Hauser
Silke Schmidt
Center for Human Genetics · USDuke Medical Center · USDuke University Hospital · US

Funding

GENECARD-Gene Identification in Early-Onset CADR01HL073389 · NHLBI · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI HAUSER, ELIZABETH R · 2003 to 2007
$3.5M
Statistical models for genetic studies of AMDR03EY015216 · NEI · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI SCHMIDT, SILKE A · 2004 to 2005
$462k
NEI NIH HHS R03 EY015216NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL073389
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGenomic screens generally employ a single-locus strategy for linkage analysis, but this may have low power in the presence of epistasis. Ordered subsets analysis (OSA) is a method for conditional linkage analysis using continuous covariates.

methodsWe used OSA to evaluate two-locus interactions in the simulated Genetic Analysis Workshop 14 dataset. We used all nuclear families ascertained by Aipotu, Karangar, and Danacaa. Using the single-nucleotide polymorphism map, multipoint affected-sibling-pair (ASP) linkage analysis was performed on all 100 replicates for each chromosome using SIBLINK. OSA was used to examine linkage on each chromosome using LOD scores at each 3-cM location on every other chromosome as covariates. Two methods were used to identify positive results: one searching across the entire covariate chromosome, the other conditioning on location of known disease loci.

resultsSingle-locus linkage analysis revealed very high LOD scores for disease loci D1 through D4, with mean LOD scores over 100 replicates ranging from 4.0 to 7.8. Although OSA did not obscure this linkage evidence, it did not detect the simulated interactions between any of the locus pairs. We found inflated type I error rates using the first OSA method, highlighting the need to correct for multiple comparisons. Therefore, using "null chromosome pairs" without simulated disease loci, we calculated a corrected alpha-level.

conclusionWe were unable to detect two-locus interactions using OSA. This may have been due to lack of incorporation of phenotypic subgroups, or because linkage evidence as summarized by LOD scores performs poorly as an OSA covariate. We found inflated type I error rates, but were able to calculate a corrected alpha-level for future analyses employing this strategy to search for two-locus interactions.

Indexed as

Chromosome MappingEpistasis, GeneticNuclear FamilyChromosomes, HumanDiseaseHumansReproducibility of Results

Identifiers

PMID16451608
PMCPMC1866787
OpenAlexW2025596147

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.