ArticleAnnals of human genetics2015
A family-based joint test for mean and variance heterogeneity for quantitative traits.
Article in Annals of human genetics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- MELODY: Mediation Analysis in Logistic Regression for High-Dimensional Mediators and a Binary Outcome.Genetic epidemiology · 2026Article
- MELODY: Mediation Analysis in Logistic Regression for High-Dimensional Mediators and a Binary Outcome.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Estimation of total mediation effect for high-dimensional omics mediators.BMC bioinformatics · 2021Article
- Integrating DNA sequencing and transcriptomic data for association analyses of low-frequency variants and lipid traits.Human molecular genetics · 2020Article
- Statistical tests for detecting variance effects in quantitative trait studies.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2019Article
- Identifying loci affecting trait variability and detecting interactions in genome-wide association studies.Nature genetics · 2018Article
- A sibling method for identifying vQTLs.PloS one · 2018Article
- Exploiting Single-Cell Quantitative Data to Map Genetic Variants Having Probabilistic Effects.PLoS genetics · 2016Article
- Genome-wide association study reveals novel loci for litter size and its variability in a Large White pig population.BMC genomics · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Traditional quantitative trait locus (QTL) analysis focuses on identifying loci associated with mean heterogeneity. Recent research has discovered loci associated with phenotype variance heterogeneity (vQTL), which is important in studying genetic association with complex traits, especially for identifying gene-gene and gene-environment interactions. While several tests have been proposed to detect vQTL for unrelated individuals, there are no tests for related individuals, commonly seen in family-based genetic studies. Here we introduce a likelihood ratio test (LRT) for identifying mean and variance heterogeneity simultaneously or for either effect alone, adjusting for covariates and family relatedness using a linear mixed effect model approach. The LRT test statistic for normally distributed quantitative traits approximately follows χ(2)-distributions. To correct for inflated Type I error for non-normally distributed quantitative traits, we propose a parametric bootstrap-based LRT that removes the best linear unbiased prediction (BLUP) of family random effect. Simulation studies show that our family-based test controls Type I error and has good power, while Type I error inflation is observed when family relatedness is ignored. We demonstrate the utility and efficiency gains of the proposed method using data from the Framingham Heart Study to detect loci associated with body mass index (BMI) variability.
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.