ArticleHuman heredity2014
A new system identification approach to identify genetic variants in sequencing studies for a binary phenotype.
Article in Human heredity, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- STEPS: an efficient prospective likelihood approach to genetic association analyses of secondary traits in extreme phenotype sequencing.Biostatistics (Oxford, England) · 2020Article
- A Robust and Powerful Set-Valued Approach to Rare Variant Association Analyses of Secondary Traits in Case-Control Sequencing Studies.Genetics · 2017Article
- Post hoc Analysis for Detecting Individual Rare Variant Risk Associations Using Probit Regression Bayesian Variable Selection Methods in Case-Control Sequencing Studies.Genetic epidemiology · 2016Article
- Evaluation of a two-step iterative resampling procedure for internal validation of genome-wide association studies.Journal of human genetics · 2015Article
- SVSI: fast and powerful set-valued system identification approach to identifying rare variants in sequencing studies for ordered categorical traits.Annals of human genetics · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
We propose in this paper a set-valued (SV) system model, which is a generalized form of logistic (LG) and Probit (Probit) regression, to be considered as a method for discovering genetic variants, especially rare genetic variants in next-generation sequencing studies, for a binary phenotype. We propose a new SV system identification method to estimate all underlying key system parameters for the Probit model and compare it with the LG model in the setting of genetic association studies. Across an extensive series of simulation studies, the Probit method maintained type I error control and had similar or greater power than the LG method, which is robust to different distributions of noise: logistic, normal, or t distributions. Additionally, the Probit association parameter estimate was 2.7-46.8-fold less variable than the LG log-odds ratio association parameter estimate. Less variability in the association parameter estimate translates to greater power and robustness across the spectrum of minor allele frequencies (MAFs), and these advantages are the most pronounced for rare variants. For instance, in a simulation that generated data from an additive logistic model with an odds ratio of 7.4 for a rare single nucleotide polymorphism with a MAF of 0.005 and a sample size of 2,300, the Probit method had 60% power whereas the LG method had 25% power at the α = 10(-6) level. Consistent with these simulation results, the set of variants identified by the LG method was a subset of those identified by the Probit method in two example analyses. Thus, we suggest the Probit method may be a competitive alternative to the LG method in genetic association studies such as candidate gene, genome-wide, or next-generation sequencing studies for a binary phenotype.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.