Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23665878›Full record

ArticleG3 (Bethesda, Md.)2013

Generalized admixture mapping for complex traits.

Bin Zhu, Allison E Ashley-Koch, David B Dunson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in G3 (Bethesda, Md.), 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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

3 authors.

Bin ZhuDivision of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, Maryland 20850, USA. bin.zhu@nih.gov
Allison E Ashley-Koch
David B Dunson

Funding

Duke Center for Geospatial Medicine (RMI)P20RR020782 · NCRR · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI MIRANDA, MARIE LYNN · 2004 to 2006
$1.8M
Bayesian Methods for Assessing Gene by Environment InteractionsR01ES017436 · NIEHS · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI DUNSON, DAVID BRIAN · 2009 to 2013
$1.7M
Intramural NIH HHSNCRR NIH HHS 5P2O-RR020782-O3NCRR NIH HHS P20 RR020782NIEHS NIH HHS R01 ES017436NIEHS NIH HHS R01ES017436
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Admixture mapping is a popular tool to identify regions of the genome associated with traits in a recently admixed population. Existing methods have been developed primarily for identification of a single locus influencing a dichotomous trait within a case-control study design. We propose a generalized admixture mapping (GLEAM) approach, a flexible and powerful regression method for both quantitative and qualitative traits, which is able to test for association between the trait and local ancestries in multiple loci simultaneously and adjust for covariates. The new method is based on the generalized linear model and uses a quadratic normal moment prior to incorporate admixture prior information. Through simulation, we demonstrate that GLEAM achieves lower type I error rate and higher power than ANCESTRYMAP both for qualitative traits and more significantly for quantitative traits. We applied GLEAM to genome-wide SNP data from the Illumina African American panel derived from a cohort of black women participating in the Healthy Pregnancy, Healthy Baby study and identified a locus on chromosome 2 associated with the averaged maternal mean arterial pressure during 24 to 28 weeks of pregnancy.

Indexed as

Chromosome MappingGenetic Association StudiesLinkage DisequilibriumQuantitative Trait LociBlack or African AmericanCase-Control StudiesFemaleGenetics, PopulationGenome, HumanHumansModels, TheoreticalPregnancygeneralized linear modellocal ancestrymapping by admixture linkage disequilibriumquadratic normal moment priorquantitative traits

Identifiers

PMID23665878
PMCPMC3704244

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.