Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21386969›Full record

ArticlePloS one2011

Practical and theoretical considerations in study design for detecting gene-gene interactions using MDR and GMDR approaches.

Guo-Bo Chen, Yi Xu, Hai-Ming Xu, Ming D Li, Jun Zhu, Xiang-Yang Lou

Abstract readEvaluation StudyValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

6 authors.

Guo-Bo ChenInstitute of Bioinformatics, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, People's Republic of China.
Yi Xu
Hai-Ming Xu
Ming D Li
Jun Zhu
Xiang-Yang Lou

Funding

MAPPING OF SUSCEPTIBILITY LOCI FOR NICOTINE DEPENDENCER01DA012844 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA · PI LI, MING D · 1999 to 2013
$10.0M
Genome Wide Haplotype Association AnalysisR01GM081488 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM · PI LIU, NIANJUN · 2008 to 2012
$1.3M
Detection of multifactor interactions with application to nicotine dependenceR01DA025095 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA · PI LOU, XIANG-YANG · 2008 to 2013
$1.1M
Integrative genomics to to dissect the genetic regulation of T1D onsetR01DK080100 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM · PI WANG, XUJING · 2007 to 2010
$1.0M
NIDA NIH HHS DA025095NIDA NIH HHS DA12844NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA012844NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA025095NIDDK NIH HHS DK080100NIDDK NIH HHS R01 DK080100NIGMS NIH HHS GM081488NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM081488
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Detection of interacting risk factors for complex traits is challenging. The choice of an appropriate method, sample size, and allocation of cases and controls are serious concerns. To provide empirical guidelines for planning such studies and data analyses, we investigated the performance of the multifactor dimensionality reduction (MDR) and generalized MDR (GMDR) methods under various experimental scenarios. We developed the mathematical expectation of accuracy and used it as an indicator parameter to perform a gene-gene interaction study. We then examined the statistical power of GMDR and MDR within the plausible range of accuracy (0.50∼0.65) reported in the literature. The GMDR with covariate adjustment had a power of >80% in a case-control design with a sample size of ≥2000, with theoretical accuracy ranging from 0.56 to 0.62. However, when the accuracy was <0.56, a sample size of ≥4000 was required to have sufficient power. In our simulations, the GMDR outperformed the MDR under all models with accuracy ranging from 0.56∼0.62 for a sample size of 1000-2000. However, the two methods performed similarly when the accuracy was outside this range or the sample was significantly larger. We conclude that with adjustment of a covariate, GMDR performs better than MDR and a sample size of 1000∼2000 is reasonably large for detecting gene-gene interactions in the range of effect size reported by the current literature; whereas larger sample size is required for more subtle interactions with accuracy <0.56.

Indexed as

Models, TheoreticalAlgorithmsComputer SimulationDiseaseEpistasis, GeneticHumansLogistic ModelsModels, GeneticMultifactor Dimensionality ReductionReproducibility of ResultsResearch Design

Identifiers

PMID21386969
PMCPMC3046176

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.