Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23923021›Full record

ArticlePloS one2013

From interaction to co-association --a Fisher r-to-z transformation-based simple statistic for real world genome-wide association study.

Zhongshang Yuan, Hong Liu, Xiaoshuai Zhang, Fangyu Li, Jinghua Zhao, Furen Zhang, Fuzhong Xue

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Detecting epistasis in human complex traits.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2014
    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

7 authors.

Zhongshang YuanDepartment of Epidemiology and Health Statistics, School of Public Health, Shandong University, Jinan, China.
Hong Liu
Xiaoshuai Zhang
Fangyu Li
Jinghua Zhao
Furen Zhang
Fuzhong Xue

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Currently, the genetic variants identified by genome wide association study (GWAS) generally only account for a small proportion of the total heritability for complex disease. One crucial reason is the underutilization of gene-gene joint effects commonly encountered in GWAS, which includes their main effects and co-association. However, gene-gene co-association is often customarily put into the framework of gene-gene interaction vaguely. From the causal graph perspective, we elucidate in detail the concept and rationality of gene-gene co-association as well as its relationship with traditional gene-gene interaction, and propose two Fisher r-to-z transformation-based simple statistics to detect it. Three series of simulations further highlight that gene-gene co-association refers to the extent to which the joint effects of two genes differs from the main effects, not only due to the traditional interaction under the nearly independent condition but the correlation between two genes. The proposed statistics are more powerful than logistic regression under various situations, cannot be affected by linkage disequilibrium and can have acceptable false positive rate as long as strictly following the reasonable GWAS data analysis roadmap. Furthermore, an application to gene pathway analysis associated with leprosy confirms in practice that our proposed gene-gene co-association concepts as well as the correspondingly proposed statistics are strongly in line with reality.

Indexed as

Epistasis, GeneticGenome-Wide Association StudyModels, GeneticModels, StatisticalAlgorithmsComputer SimulationHumansLinkage DisequilibriumPolymorphism, Single NucleotideSample Size

Identifiers

PMID23923021
PMCPMC3726765

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.