Author reply to A commentary on Pitfalls of predicting complex traits from SNPs.

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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Intermediate molecular phenotypes to identify genetic markers of anthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity risk.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2023
   Article
2. Pan-genomic open reading frames: A potential supplement of single nucleotide polymorphisms in estimation of heritability and genomic prediction.PLoS genetics · 2020
   Article
3. We are all individuals... bioinformatics in the personalized medicine era.Cellular oncology (Dordrecht, Netherlands) · 2015
   Review
4. Statistical power to detect genetic (co)variance of complex traits using SNP data in unrelated samples.PLoS genetics · 2014
   Article

Corrections and comments

• Comment on
  Pitfalls of predicting complex traits from SNPs.2013
• Comment on
  A commentary on Pitfalls of predicting complex traits from SNPs.2013

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Funding

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as