ArticleGene2012
Design and analysis of multiple diseases genome-wide association studies without controls.
Article in Gene, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Discovering biomarkers associated and predicting cardiovascular disease with high accuracy using a novel nexus of machine learning techniques for precision medicine.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Article
- A gene-based test of association through an orthogonal decomposition of genotype scores.Human genetics · 2017Article
- Detecting differentially methylated loci for multiple treatments based on high-throughput methylation data.BMC bioinformatics · 2014Article
- A new association test based on disease allele selection for case-control genome-wide association studies.BMC genomics · 2014Article
- A new statistical approach to combining p-values using gamma distribution and its application to genome-wide association study.BMC bioinformatics · 2014Article
- Age-adjusted nonparametric detection of differential DNA methylation with case-control designs.BMC bioinformatics · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In genome-wide association studies (GWAS), multiple diseases with shared controls is one of the case-control study designs. If data obtained from these studies are appropriately analyzed, this design can have several advantages such as improving statistical power in detecting associations and reducing the time and cost in the data collection process. In this paper, we propose a study design for GWAS which involves multiple diseases but without controls. We also propose corresponding statistical data analysis strategy for GWAS with multiple diseases but no controls. Through a simulation study, we show that the statistical association test with the proposed study design is more powerful than the test with single disease sharing common controls, and it has comparable power to the overall test based on the whole dataset including the controls. We also apply the proposed method to a real GWAS dataset to illustrate the methodologies and the advantages of the proposed design. Some possible limitations of this study design and testing method and their solutions are also discussed. Our findings indicate that the proposed study design and statistical analysis strategy could be more efficient than the usual case-control GWAS as well as those with shared controls.
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.