ArticleJournal of human genetics2015
A powerful association test for qualitative traits incorporating imprinting effects using general pedigree data.
Article in Journal of human genetics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
For qualitative traits and diallelic marker loci, the pedigree disequilibrium test (PDT) based on general pedigrees and its extension (Monte Carlo PDT (MCPDT)) for dealing with missing genotypes are simple and powerful tests for association. There is an increasing interest of incorporating imprinting into association analysis. However, PDT and MCPDT do not take account of the information on imprinting effects in the analysis, which may reduce their test powers when the effects are present. On the other hand, the transmission disequilibrium test with imprinting (TDTI*) combines imprinting into the mapping of association variants. However, TDTI* only accommodates two-generation nuclear families and thus is not suitable for extended pedigrees. In this article, we first extend PDT to incorporate imprinting and propose PDTI for complete pedigrees (no missing genotypes). To fully utilize pedigrees with missing genotypes, we further develop the Monte Carlo PDTI (MCPDTI) statistic based on Monte Carlo sampling and estimation. Both PDTI and MCPDTI are derived in a two-stage framework. Simulation study shows that PDTI and MCPDTI control the size well under the null hypothesis of no association and are more powerful than PDT and TDTI* (based on a sample of nuclear families randomly selecting from pedigrees) when imprinting effects exist.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25518739What 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.