ArticleGenetic epidemiology2011
Incorporating biological information into association studies of sequencing data.
Article in Genetic epidemiology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- A partition-based approach to identify gene-environment interactions in genome wide association studies.BMC proceedings · 2014Article
- Bridging the gap between biologic, individual, and macroenvironmental factors in cancer: a multilevel approach.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2013Article
- The value of extended pedigrees for next-generation analysis of complex disease in the rhesus macaque.ILAR journal · 2013Review
- Lessons learned from Genetic Analysis Workshop 17: transitioning from genome-wide association studies to whole-genome statistical genetic analysis.Genetic epidemiology · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issuedChen, Gary [corrected to Chen, Gary K]
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
We summarize the methodological contributions from Group 3 of Genetic Analysis Workshop 17 (GAW17). The overarching goal of these methods was the evaluation and enhancement of state-of-the-art approaches in integration of biological knowledge into association studies of rare variants. We found that methods loosely fell into three major categories: (1) hypothesis testing of index scores based on aggregating rare variants at the gene level, (2) variable selection techniques that incorporate biological prior information, and (3) novel approaches that integrate external (i.e., not provided by GAW17) prior information, such as pathway and single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) annotations. Commonalities among the findings from these contributions are that gene-based analysis of rare variants is advantageous to single-SNP analysis and that the minor allele frequency threshold to identify rare variants may influence power and thus needs to be carefully considered. A consistent increase in power was also identified by considering only nonsynonymous SNPs in the analyses. Overall, we found that no single method had an appreciable advantage over the other methods. However, methods that carried out sensitivity analyses by comparing biologically informative to noninformative prior probabilities demonstrated that integrating biological knowledge into statistical analyses always, at the least, enabled subtle improvements in the performance of any statistical method applied to these simulated data. Although these statistical improvements reflect the simulation model assumed for GAW17, our hope is that the simulation models provide a reasonable representation of the underlying biology and that these methods can thus be of utility in real data.
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.