Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25383782›Full record

ArticlePloS one2014

Association studies with imputed variants using expectation-maximization likelihood-ratio tests.

Kuan-Chieh Huang, Wei Sun, Ying Wu, Mengjie Chen, Karen L Mohlke, Leslie A Lange, Yun Li

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

Kuan-Chieh HuangDepartment of Biostatistics, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States of America.
Wei SunDepartment of Biostatistics, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States of America; Department of Genetics, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States of America.
Ying WuDepartment of Genetics, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States of America.
Mengjie ChenDepartment of Biostatistics, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States of America; Department of Genetics, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States of America.
Karen L MohlkeDepartment of Genetics, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States of America.
Leslie A LangeDepartment of Genetics, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States of America.
Yun LiDepartment of Biostatistics, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States of America; Department of Genetics, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States of America; Department of Computer Science, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States of America.

Funding

Deep sequencing studies for cannabis and stimulant dependenceR01DA030976 · NIDA · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI EHLERS, CINDY L, GELERNTER, JOEL · 2010 to 2014
$16.5M
Design and Analysis of Sequencing-based Studies for Complex Human TraitsR01HG006292 · NHGRI · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI LI, YUN · 2011 to 2015
$1.8M
Imputation and Analysis of Rare Variants in Admixed PopulationsR01HG006703 · NHGRI · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI LI, YUN · 2012 to 2014
$931k
NHGRI NIH HHS R01 HG006292NHGRI NIH HHS R01HG006292NHGRI NIH HHS R01 HG006703NHGRI NIH HHS R01HG006703NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA030976NIDA NIH HHS R01DA030976
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genotype imputation has become standard practice in modern genetic studies. As sequencing-based reference panels continue to grow, increasingly more markers are being well or better imputed but at the same time, even more markers with relatively low minor allele frequency are being imputed with low imputation quality. Here, we propose new methods that incorporate imputation uncertainty for downstream association analysis, with improved power and/or computational efficiency. We consider two scenarios: I) when posterior probabilities of all potential genotypes are estimated; and II) when only the one-dimensional summary statistic, imputed dosage, is available. For scenario I, we have developed an expectation-maximization likelihood-ratio test for association based on posterior probabilities. When only imputed dosages are available (scenario II), we first sample the genotype probabilities from its posterior distribution given the dosages, and then apply the EM-LRT on the sampled probabilities. Our simulations show that type I error of the proposed EM-LRT methods under both scenarios are protected. Compared with existing methods, EM-LRT-Prob (for scenario I) offers optimal statistical power across a wide spectrum of MAF and imputation quality. EM-LRT-Dose (for scenario II) achieves a similar level of statistical power as EM-LRT-Prob and, outperforms the standard Dosage method, especially for markers with relatively low MAF or imputation quality. Applications to two real data sets, the Cebu Longitudinal Health and Nutrition Survey study and the Women's Health Initiative Study, provide further support to the validity and efficiency of our proposed methods.

Indexed as

Genetic VariationGenotypeModels, GeneticComputer SimulationGenetic Association StudiesGenetic MarkersHumansLikelihood FunctionsGenetic Markers

Identifiers

PMID25383782
PMCPMC4226494

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.