ArticleHuman heredity2010
Test selection with application to detecting disease association with multiple SNPs.
Article in Human heredity, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Excalibur: A new ensemble method based on an optimal combination of aggregation tests for rare-variant association testing for sequencing data.PLoS computational biology · 2023Article
- Integrating germline and somatic genetics to identify genes associated with lung cancer.Genetic epidemiology · 2020Article
- A powerful microbiome-based association test and a microbial taxa discovery framework for comprehensive association mapping.Microbiome · 2017Article
- An adaptive association test for microbiome data.Genome medicine · 2016Article
- Highly adaptive tests for group differences in brain functional connectivity.NeuroImage. Clinical · 2015Article
- A powerful and adaptive association test for rare variants.Genetics · 2014Article
- Kernel machine SNP-set testing under multiple candidate kernels.Genetic epidemiology · 2013Article
- On multi-marker tests for association in case-control studies.Frontiers in genetics · 2013Article
- Power of single- vs. multi-marker tests of association.Genetic epidemiology · 2012Article
- Similarity-based multimarker association tests for continuous traits.Annals of human genetics · 2012Article
- A dimension reduction approach for modeling multi-locus interaction in case-control studies.Human heredity · 2011Article
- Powerful multi-marker association tests: unifying genomic distance-based regression and logistic regression.Genetic epidemiology · 2010Article
- Statistical analysis strategies for association studies involving rare variants.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2010Review
- A data-adaptive sum test for disease association with multiple common or rare variants.Human heredity · 2010Article
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
We consider the motivating problem of testing for association between a phenotype and multiple single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) within a candidate gene or region. Various statistical approaches have been proposed, including those based on either (combining univariate) single-locus analyses or (multivariate) multilocus analyses. However, it is known in theory that there is no single uniformly most powerful test to detect association with multiple SNPs. On the other hand, several tests have been shown to be among frequent winners across a range of practical situations, but the identity of the most powerful one changes with the situation in an unknown way. Here we propose a novel test selection procedure to select from five such tests: a so-called UminP test that combines multiple univariate/single-locus score tests by taking the minimum of their p values as its test statistic, a multivariate score test and its two modifications, and a so-called sum test. We also illustrate its application to selecting genotype codings for the sum test since the performance of the sum test depends on its genotype coding in an unknown way. Our major contributions include the methodology of estimating the power of a given test with a given dataset and the idea of using the estimated power as the criterion for test selection. We also propose a fast simulation-based method to calculate p values for the test selection procedure and for any method of combining p values. Our numerical results indicated that the proposed test selection procedure always yielded power close to the most powerful test among the candidate tests at any given situation, and in particular, our proposed test selection performed either better than or as well as the popular combining method of taking the minimum p value of the candidate tests.
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.