ReviewHuman genetics2012
U-statistics in genetic association studies.
Review in Human genetics, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Reexamining Dis/Similarity-Based Tests for Rare-Variant Association with Case-Control Samples.Genetics · 2018Article
- Complex polymorphisms in endocytosis genes suggest alpha-cyclodextrin as a treatment for breast cancer.PloS one · 2018Article
- A functional U-statistic method for association analysis of sequencing data.Genetic epidemiology · 2017Article
- A powerful nonparametric statistical framework for family-based association analyses.Genetics · 2015Article
- Single-nucleotide polymorphisms in DNA bypass polymerase genes and association with breast cancer and breast cancer subtypes among African Americans and Whites.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2015Article
- A weighted U-statistic for genetic association analyses of sequencing data.Genetic epidemiology · 2014Article
- From single-SNP to wide-locus: genome-wide association studies identifying functionally related genes and intragenic regions in small sample studies.Pharmacogenomics · 2013Article
- 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
Many common human diseases are complex and are expected to be highly heterogeneous, with multiple causative loci and multiple rare and common variants at some of the causative loci contributing to the risk of these diseases. Data from the genome-wide association studies (GWAS) and metadata such as known gene functions and pathways provide the possibility of identifying genetic variants, genes and pathways that are associated with complex phenotypes. Single-marker-based tests have been very successful in identifying thousands of genetic variants for hundreds of complex phenotypes. However, these variants only explain very small percentages of the heritabilities. To account for the locus- and allelic-heterogeneity, gene-based and pathway-based tests can be very useful in the next stage of the analysis of GWAS data. U-statistics, which summarize the genomic similarity between pair of individuals and link the genomic similarity to phenotype similarity, have proved to be very useful for testing the associations between a set of single nucleotide polymorphisms and the phenotypes. Compared to single marker analysis, the advantages afforded by the U-statistics-based methods is large when the number of markers involved is large. We review several formulations of U-statistics in genetic association studies and point out the links of these statistics with other similarity-based tests of genetic association. Finally, potential application of U-statistics in analysis of the next-generation sequencing data and rare variants association studies are discussed.
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.