Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23280596›Full record

ArticleGenetic epidemiology2013

SNP prioritization using a Bayesian probability of association.

John R Thompson, Martin Gögele, Christian X Weichenberger, Mirko Modenese, John Attia, Jennifer H Barrett, Michael Boehnke, Alessandro De Grandi, Francisco S Domingues, Andrew A Hicks and 14 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genetic epidemiology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

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

24 authors.

John R ThompsonDepartment of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, United Kingdom. john.thompson@le.ac.uk
Martin Gögele
Christian X Weichenberger
Mirko Modenese
John Attia
Jennifer H Barrett
Michael Boehnke
Alessandro De Grandi
Francisco S Domingues
Andrew A Hicks
Fabio Marroni
Cristian Pattaro
Fabrizio Ruggeri
Giuseppe Borsani
Giorgio Casari
Giovanni Parmigiani
Andrea Pastore
Arne Pfeufer
Christine Schwienbacher
Daniel Taliun
CKDGen Consortium
Caroline S Fox
Peter P Pramstaller
Cosetta Minelli

Funding

Regional Pilot And Feasibility Study Grants ProgramP30DK020572 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI Mehboob A Hussain · 2013 to 2026
$24.3M
Framingham Heart Study/FoxZIAHL006094 · NHLBI · NATIONAL HEART, LUNG, AND BLOOD INSTITUTE · PI FOX, CAROLINE · 2010 to 2015
$6.9M
DESIGN AND ANALYSIS OF HUMAN GENE MAPPING STUDIESR01HG000376 · NHGRI · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI BOEHNKE, MICHAEL L · 1993 to 2016
$5.5M
Design and Analysis of Human Gene Mapping StudiesR56HG000376 · NHGRI · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI BOEHNKE, MICHAEL L · 2017 to 2017
$400k
DESIGN ISSUES IN GENETIC LINKAGE AND SEGREGATION STUDIESR29HG000376 · NHGRI · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI BOEHNKE, MICHAEL · 1990 to 1992
–
Cancer Research UK 10589NHGRI NIH HHS HG000376NHGRI NIH HHS R01 HG000376NHGRI NIH HHS R56 HG000376NIDDK NIH HHS P30 DK020572
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Prioritization is the process whereby a set of possible candidate genes or SNPs is ranked so that the most promising can be taken forward into further studies. In a genome-wide association study, prioritization is usually based on the P-values alone, but researchers sometimes take account of external annotation information about the SNPs such as whether the SNP lies close to a good candidate gene. Using external information in this way is inherently subjective and is often not formalized, making the analysis difficult to reproduce. Building on previous work that has identified 14 important types of external information, we present an approximate Bayesian analysis that produces an estimate of the probability of association. The calculation combines four sources of information: the genome-wide data, SNP information derived from bioinformatics databases, empirical SNP weights, and the researchers' subjective prior opinions. The calculation is fast enough that it can be applied to millions of SNPS and although it does rely on subjective judgments, those judgments are made explicit so that the final SNP selection can be reproduced. We show that the resulting probability of association is intuitively more appealing than the P-value because it is easier to interpret and it makes allowance for the power of the study. We illustrate the use of the probability of association for SNP prioritization by applying it to a meta-analysis of kidney function genome-wide association studies and demonstrate that SNP selection performs better using the probability of association compared with P-values alone.

Indexed as

Bayes TheoremGenome-Wide Association StudyPolymorphism, Single NucleotideDatabases, GeneticHumansKidneyMeta-Analysis as TopicModels, GeneticProbability

Identifiers

PMID23280596
PMCPMC3725584

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.