Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22303404›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in genetics2011

On the Aggregation of Multimarker Information for Marker-Set and Sequencing Data Analysis: Genotype Collapsing vs. Similarity Collapsing.

Monnat Pongpanich, Megan L Neely, Jung-Ying Tzeng

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in genetics, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

3 authors.

Monnat PongpanichBioinformatics Research Center, North Carolina State University Raleigh, NC, USA.
Megan L Neely
Jung-Ying Tzeng

Funding

Statistical Methods for Cancer Clinical TrialsP01CA142538 · NCI · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI DAVIDIAN, MARIE, KOSOROK, MICHAEL R · 2010 to 2019
$21.3M
Replication of Schizophrenia Associations in CATIER01MH074027 · NIMH · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI SULLIVAN, PATRICK F · 2006 to 2007
$715k
NCI NIH HHS P01 CA142538NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH074027
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Methods that collapse information across genetic markers when searching for association signals are gaining momentum in the literature. Although originally developed to achieve a better balance between retaining information and controlling degrees of freedom when performing multimarker association analysis, these methods have recently been proven to be a powerful tool for identifying rare variants that contribute to complex phenotypes. The information among markers can be collapsed at the genotype level, which focuses on the mean of genetic information, or the similarity level, which focuses on the variance of genetic information. The aim of this work is to understand the strengths and weaknesses of these two collapsing strategies. Our results show that neither collapsing strategy outperforms the other across all simulated scenarios. Two factors that dominate the performance of these strategies are the signal-to-noise ratio and the underlying genetic architecture of the causal variants. Genotype collapsing is more sensitive to the marker set being contaminated by noise loci than similarity collapsing. In addition, genotype collapsing performs best when the genetic architecture of the causal variants is not complex (e.g., causal loci with similar effects and similar frequencies). Similarity collapsing is more robust as the complexity of the genetic architecture increases and outperforms genotype collapsing when the genetic architecture of the marker set becomes more sophisticated (e.g., causal loci with various effect sizes or frequencies and potential non-linear or interactive effects). Because the underlying genetic architecture is not known a priori, we also considered a two-stage analysis that combines the two top-performing methods from different collapsing strategies. We find that it is reasonably robust across all simulated scenarios.

Indexed as

genotype-level vs. similarity-level collapsingmultimarker association analysis

Identifiers

PMID22303404
PMCPMC3266618

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.