ArticleGenetic epidemiology2009
Combining information from linkage and association methods.
Article in Genetic epidemiology, 2009. 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Group 12 evaluated approaches to incorporate outside information or otherwise optimize traditional linkage and association analyses. The abundance of available data allowed exploration of identity-by-descent (IBD) estimation, score statistics, formal combination of linkage and association testing, significance estimation, and replication. We observed that IBD estimation can be optimized with a subset of marker data while estimation of inheritance vectors can provide both IBD estimates and a measure of their uncertainty. Score statistics incorporating covariates or combining association and linkage information performed at least as well as standard approaches while requiring less computation time. The formal combination of linkage and association methods may be fruitful, although the nature of the simulated data limited our conclusions. Estimation of significance may be improved through simulation, correction for cryptic relatedness, and the inclusion of prior information. Replication using real data provided consistent results, though the same was not true of simulated data replicates. Overall, we found that increasing the amount of available data limits analyses due to computational constraints and motivates the need to improve methods for the identification of complex-trait genes.
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.