Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20018078›Full record

ArticleBMC proceedings2009

Evaluating epistatic interaction signals in complex traits using quantitative traits.

Odity Mukherjee, Krishna Rao Sanapala, Padmanabhan Anbazhagana, Saurabh Ghosh

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC proceedings, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 29% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Odity MukherjeeNational Center for Biological Sciences, Bangalore, India. omukherjee@ncbs.res.in.
Krishna Rao Sanapala
Padmanabhan Anbazhagana
Saurabh Ghosh
Indian Statistical Institute · INNational Centre for Biological Sciences · INNational Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences · IN

Funding

GENETIC ANALYSIS OF COMMON DISEASES: AN EVALUATIONR01GM031575 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS RIO GRANDE VALLEY · PI ALMASY, LAURA A. · 1985 to 2016
$7.8M
NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM031575
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a complex, chronic inflammatory disease implicated to have several plausible candidate loci; however, these may not account for all the genetic variations underlying RA. Common disorders are hypothesized to be highly complex with interaction among genes and other risk factors playing a major role in the disease process. This complexity is further magnified because such interactions may be with or without a strong independent effect and are thus difficult to detect using traditional statistical methodologies. The main challenge to analyze such gene x gene and gene x environment interaction is attributed to a phenomenon referred to as the "curse of dimensionality." Several combinatorial methodologies have been proposed to tackle this analytical challenge. Because quantitative traits underlie complex phenotypes and contain more information on the trait variation within genotypes than qualitative dichotomy, analyzing quantitative traits correlated with the affection status is a more powerful tool for mapping such trait genes. Recently, a generalized multifactor dimensionality reduction method was proposed that allows for adjustment for discrete and quantitative traits and can be used to analyze qualitative and quantitative phenotypes in a population based study design.In this report, we evaluate the efficiency of the generalized multifactor dimensionality reduction statistical suite to decipher small interacting factors that contribute to RA disease pathogenesis.

Identifiers

PMID20018078
PMCPMC2795985
OpenAlexW2066084204

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.