Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22883141›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of human genetics2012

Phasing of many thousands of genotyped samples.

Amy L Williams, Nick Patterson, Joseph Glessner, Hakon Hakonarson, David Reich

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of human genetics, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 72 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
72citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
8.9field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

72 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 124 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Fast two-stage phasing of large-scale sequence data.American journal of human genetics · 2021
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Genome-wide association study accounting for anticholinergic burden to examine cognitive dysfunction in psychotic disorders.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2021
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

12 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Amy L WilliamsDepartment of Genetics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115, USA; Broad Institute of Harvard and MIT, Cambridge, MA 02142, USA. alw@genetics.med.harvard.edu
Nick Patterson
Joseph Glessner
Hakon Hakonarson
David Reich
Broad Institute · USChildren's Hospital of Philadelphia · US

Funding

Population mixture in evolutionary and medical geneticsR01GM100233 · NIGMS · HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL · PI PATTERSON, NICK J, REICH, DAVID E · 2012 to 2019
$2.7M
Population genetics to improve homozygosity mapping and mapping in admixed groupsF32HG005944 · NHGRI · HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL · PI WILLIAMS, AMY LYNNE · 2010 to 2012
$146k
NHGRI NIH HHS F32 HG005944NHGRI NIH HHS F32HG005944NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM100233Wellcome Trust 076113Wellcome Trust 085475
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Haplotypes are an important resource for a large number of applications in human genetics, but computationally inferred haplotypes are subject to switch errors that decrease their utility. The accuracy of computationally inferred haplotypes increases with sample size, and although ever larger genotypic data sets are being generated, the fact that existing methods require substantial computational resources limits their applicability to data sets containing tens or hundreds of thousands of samples. Here, we present HAPI-UR (haplotype inference for unrelated samples), an algorithm that is designed to handle unrelated and/or trio and duo family data, that has accuracy comparable to or greater than existing methods, and that is computationally efficient and can be applied to 100,000 samples or more. We use HAPI-UR to phase a data set with 58,207 samples and show that it achieves practical runtime and that switch errors decrease with sample size even with the use of samples from multiple ethnicities. Using a data set with 16,353 samples, we compare HAPI-UR to Beagle, MaCH, IMPUTE2, and SHAPEIT and show that HAPI-UR runs 18× faster than all methods and has a lower switch-error rate than do other methods except for Beagle; with the use of consensus phasing, running HAPI-UR three times gives a slightly lower switch-error rate than Beagle does and is more than six times faster. We demonstrate results similar to those from Beagle on another data set with a higher marker density. Lastly, we show that HAPI-UR has better runtime scaling properties than does Beagle so that for larger data sets, HAPI-UR will be practical and will have an even larger runtime advantage. HAPI-UR is available online (see Web Resources).

Indexed as

AlgorithmsGeneticsSoftwareComputational BiologyHaplotypesHumansInternetResearch DesignSample Size

Identifiers

PMID22883141
PMCPMC3415548
OpenAlexW2080613667

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.