Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22510851›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of human genetics : EJHG2012

Sampling strategies for rare variant tests in case-control studies.

Sebastian Zöllner

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

1 author.

Sebastian ZöllnerDepartment of Biostatistics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA. szoellne@umich.edu

Funding

Population genetics for large-scale sequencing studies of diverse populationsR01HG005855 · NHGRI · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI Noah Rosenberg, Paul A Scheet · 2010 to 2026
$5.8M
NHGRI NIH HHS HG 005855NHGRI NIH HHS R01 HG005855
6 · The paper itself

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

Genetic VariationModels, GeneticCase-Control StudiesHumansInheritance PatternsPatient SelectionPedigreeSample SizeSequence Analysis, DNA

Identifiers

PMID22510851
PMCPMC3449077

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.