ArticleGenetics2006
Nonlinear tests for genomewide association studies.
Article in Genetics, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Information Theory in Computational Biology: Where We Stand Today.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Transgenerational Interaction of Alzheimer's Disease with Schizophrenia through Amyloid Evolvability.Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD · 2019Review
- Human genetics of diabetic retinopathy.Journal of endocrinological investigation · 2014Review
- Human genetics of diabetic vascular complications.Journal of genetics · 2013Review
- Genetic association studies: an information content perspective.Current genomics · 2012Article
- Gene-environment interaction in genome-wide association studies.American journal of epidemiology · 2009Article
- Detecting gene-environment interactions in genome-wide association data.Genetic epidemiology · 2009Article
- Association between urokinase haplotypes and outcome from infection-associated acute lung injury.Intensive care medicine · 2008Article
- Entropy-based joint analysis for two-stage genome-wide association studies.Journal of human genetics · 2007Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
As millions of single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) have been identified and high-throughput genotyping technologies have been rapidly developed, large-scale genomewide association studies are soon within reach. However, since a genomewide association study involves a large number of SNPs it is therefore nearly impossible to ensure a genomewide significance level of 0.05 using the available statistics, although the multiple-test problems can be alleviated, but not sufficiently, by the use of tagging SNPs. One strategy to circumvent the multiple-test problem associated with genome-wide association tests is to develop novel test statistics with high power. In this report, we introduce several nonlinear tests, which are based on nonlinear transformation of allele or haplotype frequencies. We investigate the power of the nonlinear test statistics and demonstrate that under certain conditions, some nonlinear test statistics have much higher power than the standard chi2-test statistic. Type I error rates of the nonlinear tests are validated using simulation studies. We also show that a class of similarity measure-based test statistics is based on the quadratic function of allele or haplotype frequencies, and thus they belong to nonlinear tests. To evaluate their performance, the nonlinear test statistics are also applied to three real data sets. Our study shows that nonlinear test statistics have great potential in association studies of complex diseases.
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.