ArticlePLoS genetics2009
Designing genome-wide association studies: sample size, power, imputation, and the choice of genotyping chip.
Article in PLoS genetics, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 302 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
302 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Pooled it
- A meta-analysis of genome-wide association studies revealed significant QTL and candidate genes for loin muscle area in three breeding pigs.Scientific reports · 2025Pooled it
- Meta-analysis of genome-wide association studies of stable warfarin dose in patients of African ancestry.Blood advances · 2024Pooled it
- Genetic architecture of alcohol consumption identified by a genotype-stratified GWAS and impact on esophageal cancer risk in Japanese people.Science advances · 2024Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Association between genetic polymorphisms and endometrial cancer risk: a systematic review.Journal of medical genetics · 2020Pooled it
- Genome-wide meta-analysis of macronutrient intake of 91,114 European ancestry participants from the cohorts for heart and aging research in genomic epidemiology consortium.Molecular psychiatry · 2019Pooled it
- Common variants in FKBP5 gene and major depressive disorder (MDD) susceptibility: a comprehensive meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2016Pooled it
- Imputing Phenotypes for Genome-wide Association Studies.American journal of human genetics · 2016Pooled it
- Novel HLA-DP region susceptibility loci associated with severe acute GvHD.Bone marrow transplantation · 2017Trial
- Bayesian fine-mapping pinpoints candidate genes and pleiotropic loci of production traits from a chicken backcrossing scheme.BMC genomics · 2026Article
- TheGenes · 2026Article
- scDesignPop generates realistic population-scale single-cell RNA-seq for power analysis, benchmarking, and privacy protection.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Leveraging low-cost short-read sequencing: revolutionizing complex trait genetics.Molecular biology and evolution · 2026Article
- Evidence of a genomic basis for growth rate variation in a natural kelp population.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Genetic Associations with Pectus Excavatum: A Systematic Review.Current issues in molecular biology · 2026Review
- Polygenic risk scores: Navigating the future of precision medicine through economic, ethical, and scientific advancements.iScience · 2026Review
- Transcription factors and candidate functional SNPs associated with variation in fatty acid composition from skeletal muscle of pigs.Animal genetics · 2025Article
- Genomic exploration of durable wheat rust resistance by integrating data from multiple worldwide populations.The plant genome · 2025Article
- Fine mapping genetic variants affecting birth weight in sheep: a GWAS of 3007 individuals using low-coverage whole genome sequencing.Journal of animal science and biotechnology · 2025Article
242 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Genome-wide association studies are revolutionizing the search for the genes underlying human complex diseases. The main decisions to be made at the design stage of these studies are the choice of the commercial genotyping chip to be used and the numbers of case and control samples to be genotyped. The most common method of comparing different chips is using a measure of coverage, but this fails to properly account for the effects of sample size, the genetic model of the disease, and linkage disequilibrium between SNPs. In this paper, we argue that the statistical power to detect a causative variant should be the major criterion in study design. Because of the complicated pattern of linkage disequilibrium (LD) in the human genome, power cannot be calculated analytically and must instead be assessed by simulation. We describe in detail a method of simulating case-control samples at a set of linked SNPs that replicates the patterns of LD in human populations, and we used it to assess power for a comprehensive set of available genotyping chips. Our results allow us to compare the performance of the chips to detect variants with different effect sizes and allele frequencies, look at how power changes with sample size in different populations or when using multi-marker tags and genotype imputation approaches, and how performance compares to a hypothetical chip that contains every SNP in HapMap. A main conclusion of this study is that marked differences in genome coverage may not translate into appreciable differences in power and that, when taking budgetary considerations into account, the most powerful design may not always correspond to the chip with the highest coverage. We also show that genotype imputation can be used to boost the power of many chips up to the level obtained from a hypothetical "complete" chip containing all the SNPs in HapMap. Our results have been encapsulated into an R software package that allows users to design future association studies and our methods provide a framework with which new chip sets can be evaluated.
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.