ArticleGenetica2010
Bayesian model averaging for evaluation of candidate gene effects.
Article in Genetica, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Single-nucleotide polymorphism detecting of some candidate genes related to lipid metabolism in Booroola Merino-Afshari sheep by Bayesian model averaging.Tropical animal health and production · 2021Article
- A pharmacogenetic signature of high response to Copaxone in late-phase clinical-trial cohorts of multiple sclerosis.Genome medicine · 2017Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Statistical assessment of candidate gene effects can be viewed as a problem of variable selection and model comparison. Given a certain number of genes to be considered, many possible models may fit to the data well, each including a specific set of gene effects and possibly their interactions. The question arises as to which of these models is most plausible. Inference about candidate gene effects based on a specific model ignores uncertainty about model choice. Here, a Bayesian model averaging approach is proposed for evaluation of candidate gene effects. The method is implemented through simultaneous sampling of multiple models. By averaging over a set of competing models, the Bayesian model averaging approach incorporates model uncertainty into inferences about candidate gene effects. Features of the method are demonstrated using a simulated data set with ten candidate genes under consideration.
Indexed as
Identifiers
20049510What 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.