Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24358113›Full record

ArticlePloS one2013

Development and application of genomic control methods for genome-wide association studies using non-additive models.

Yakov A Tsepilov, Janina S Ried, Konstantin Strauch, Harald Grallert, Cornelia M van Duijn, Tatiana I Axenovich, Yurii S Aulchenko

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 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. High-quality bonds:Frontiers in plant science · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

7 authors.

Yakov A TsepilovInstitute of Cytology and Genetics SD RAS, Novosibirsk, Russia ; Novosibirsk State University, Novosibirsk, Russia.
Janina S RiedInstitute of Genetic Epidemiology, Helmholtz Zentrum München - German Research Center for Environmental Health, Neuherberg, Germany.
Konstantin StrauchInstitute of Genetic Epidemiology, Helmholtz Zentrum München - German Research Center for Environmental Health, Neuherberg, Germany ; Institute of Medical Informatics, Biometry and Epidemiology, Chair of Genetic Epidemiology, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, Munich, Germany.
Harald GrallertResearch Unit of Molecular Epidemiology, Helmholtz Zentrum München - German Research Center for Environmental Health, Neuherberg, Germany.
Cornelia M van DuijnDepartment of Epidemiology, Erasmus MC Rotterdam, Netherlands.
Tatiana I AxenovichInstitute of Cytology and Genetics SD RAS, Novosibirsk, Russia ; Novosibirsk State University, Novosibirsk, Russia.
Yurii S AulchenkoInstitute of Cytology and Genetics SD RAS, Novosibirsk, Russia ; Novosibirsk State University, Novosibirsk, Russia ; Centre for Population Health Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) comprise a powerful tool for mapping genes of complex traits. However, an inflation of the test statistic can occur because of population substructure or cryptic relatedness, which could cause spurious associations. If information on a large number of genetic markers is available, adjusting the analysis results by using the method of genomic control (GC) is possible. GC was originally proposed to correct the Cochran-Armitage additive trend test. For non-additive models, correction has been shown to depend on allele frequencies. Therefore, usage of GC is limited to situations where allele frequencies of null markers and candidate markers are matched. In this work, we extended the capabilities of the GC method for non-additive models, which allows us to use null markers with arbitrary allele frequencies for GC. Analytical expressions for the inflation of a test statistic describing its dependency on allele frequency and several population parameters were obtained for recessive, dominant, and over-dominant models of inheritance. We proposed a method to estimate these required population parameters. Furthermore, we suggested a GC method based on approximation of the correction coefficient by a polynomial of allele frequency and described procedures to correct the genotypic (two degrees of freedom) test for cases when the model of inheritance is unknown. Statistical properties of the described methods were investigated using simulated and real data. We demonstrated that all considered methods were effective in controlling type 1 error in the presence of genetic substructure. The proposed GC methods can be applied to statistical tests for GWAS with various models of inheritance. All methods developed and tested in this work were implemented using R language as a part of the GenABEL package.

Indexed as

GenomeModels, GeneticComputer SimulationDatabases, GeneticGene FrequencyGenome-Wide Association StudyGenomicsGenotypeHumans

Identifiers

PMID24358113
PMCPMC3864791

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.