ArticleGenetic epidemiology2012
Analysis and optimal design for association studies using next-generation sequencing with case-control pools.
Article in Genetic epidemiology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- On the design and analysis of next-generation sequencing genotyping for a cohort with haplotype-informative reads.Methods (San Diego, Calif.) · 2015Article
- A stepwise likelihood ratio test procedure for rare variant selection in case-control studies.Journal of human genetics · 2014Article
- Two-stage family-based designs for sequencing studies.BMC proceedings · 2014Article
- Two-phase and family-based designs for next-generation sequencing studies.Frontiers in genetics · 2013Review
- An EM algorithm based on an internal list for estimating haplotype distributions of rare variants from pooled genotype data.BMC genetics · 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
With its potential to discover a much greater amount of genetic variation, next-generation sequencing is fast becoming an emergent tool for genetic association studies. However, the cost of sequencing all individuals in a large-scale population study is still high in comparison to most alternative genotyping options. While the ability to identify individual-level data is lost (without bar-coding), sequencing pooled samples can substantially lower costs without compromising the power to detect significant associations. We propose a hierarchical Bayesian model that estimates the association of each variant using pools of cases and controls, accounting for the variation in read depth across pools and sequencing error. To investigate the performance of our method across a range of number of pools, number of individuals within each pool, and average coverage, we undertook extensive simulations varying effect sizes, minor allele frequencies, and sequencing error rates. In general, the number of pools and pool size have dramatic effects on power while the total depth of coverage per pool has only a moderate impact. This information can guide the selection of a study design that maximizes power subject to cost, sample size, or other laboratory constraints. We provide an R package (hiPOD: hierarchical Pooled Optimal Design) to find the optimal design, allowing the user to specify a cost function, cost, and sample size limitations, and distributions of effect size, minor allele frequency, and sequencing error rate.
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.