ArticleAmerican journal of human genetics2008
Robust score statistics for QTL linkage analysis.
Article in American journal of human genetics, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Genetic and Non-genetic Determinants of Cardiovascular Disease in South Asians.Current diabetes reviews · 2021Review
- Heritability Estimation using Regression Models for Correlation.Journal of biometrics & biostatistics · 2011Article
- Genome-wide linkage scan to identify loci associated with type 2 diabetes and blood lipid phenotypes in the Sikh Diabetes Study.PloS one · 2011Article
- Mapping quantitative traits in unselected families: algorithms and examples.Genetic epidemiology · 2009Article
- A generalized family-based association test for dichotomous traits.American journal of human genetics · 2009Article
- Variance components linkage analysis with repeated measurements.Human heredity · 2009Article
- Applying novel genome-wide linkage strategies to search for loci influencing type 2 diabetes and adult height in American Samoa.Human biology · 2008Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The traditional variance components approach for quantitative trait locus (QTL) linkage analysis is sensitive to violations of normality and fails for selected sampling schemes. Recently, a number of new methods have been developed for QTL mapping in humans. Most of the new methods are based on score statistics or regression-based statistics and are expected to be relatively robust to non-normality of the trait distribution and also to selected sampling, at least in terms of type I error. Whereas the theoretical development of these statistics is more or less complete, some practical issues concerning their implementation still need to be addressed. Here we study some of these issues such as the choice of denominator variance estimates, weighting of pedigrees, effect of parameter misspecification, effect of non-normality of the trait distribution, and effect of incorporating dominance. We present a comprehensive discussion of the theoretical properties of various denominator variance estimates and of the weighting issue and then perform simulation studies for nuclear families to compare the methods in terms of power and robustness. Based on our analytical and simulation results, we provide general guidelines regarding the choice of appropriate QTL mapping statistics in practical situations.
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.