ArticleBMC proceedings2011
Different approaches for dealing with rare variants in family-based genetic studies: application of a Genetic Analysis Workshop 17 problem.
Article in BMC proceedings, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Incorporating linkage information into a common disease/rare variant framework.Genetic epidemiology · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Rare variants are becoming the new candidates in the search for genetic variants that predispose individuals to a phenotype of interest. Their low prevalence in a population requires the development of dedicated detection and analytical methods. A family-based approach could greatly enhance their detection and interpretation because rare variants are nearly family specific. In this report, we test several distinct approaches for analyzing the information provided by rare and common variants and how they can be effectively used to pinpoint putative candidate genes for follow-up studies. The analyses were performed on the mini-exome data set provided by Genetic Analysis Workshop 17. Eight approaches were tested, four using the trait's heritability estimates and four using QTDT models. These methods had their sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values compared in light of the simulation parameters. Our results highlight important limitations of current methods to deal with rare and common variants, all methods presented a reduced specificity and, consequently, prone to false positive associations. Methods analyzing common variants information showed an enhanced sensibility when compared to rare variants methods. Furthermore, our limited knowledge of the use of biological databases for gene annotations, possibly for use as covariates in regression models, imposes a barrier to further research.
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.