ArticleEuropean journal of human genetics : EJHG2012
Sampling strategies for rare variant tests in case-control studies.
Article in European journal of human genetics : EJHG, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advances in haplotype phasing and genotype imputation.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2026Review
- Gene-based and pathway-based testing for rare-variant association in affected sib pairs.Genetic epidemiology · 2020Article
- Article
- Article
- Robust Rare-Variant Association Tests For Quantitative Traits in General Pedigrees.Statistics in biosciences · 2018Article
- Likelihood-based complex trait association testing for arbitrary depth sequencing data.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2015Article
- Robust and Powerful Affected Sibpair Test for Rare Variant Association.Genetic epidemiology · 2015Article
- A statistical approach for rare-variant association testing in affected sibships.American journal of human genetics · 2015Article
- Article
- Flexible and robust methods for rare-variant testing of quantitative traits in trios and nuclear families.Genetic epidemiology · 2014Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
Advances in sequencing technology allow assessing the impact of rare variation on common disorders. For this purpose, methods combine rare variants across a gene and compare an aggregate statistic between cases and controls. However, sequencing many individuals is costly. Hence, it is necessary to identify case samples that are most likely to result in powerful tests under realistic model assumptions. Power can be increased by selecting cases that are highly likely to carry risk variants. As rare variants that contribute to the heritability of a disease co-segregate among affected family members, selecting cases that have affected family members may increase the power of rare variant tests considerably. Here I compare sequencing random cases to cases ascertained to have affected family members. I quantify the power of the different approaches and provide criteria for sample selection under different models of inheritance. Under a model of multiplicative gene-gene interaction, a sample of random cases has to be 2-16-fold larger to achieve the same power as a sample of cases ascertained to have affected family members. However, in traits with high heritability this power gain can be reduced or even reversed under models of additive gene-gene interaction. Hence study designs should depend on the studied disease's heritability and on the available sample size. I also show that selecting cases that share both chromosomes identical by descent with an affected sibling at candidate regions can result in a further power gain.
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.