ArticleBMC proceedings2014
On family-based genome-wide association studies with large pedigrees: observations and recommendations.
Article in BMC proceedings, 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.
- Genome-wide association study on blood pressure traits in the Iranian population suggests ZBED9 as a new locus for hypertension.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Protocols, Methods, and Tools for Genome-Wide Association Studies (GWAS) of Dental Traits.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2019Article
- GW-SEM: A Statistical Package to Conduct Genome-Wide Structural Equation Modeling.Behavior genetics · 2017Article
- Family-based approaches: design, imputation, analysis, and beyond.BMC genetics · 2016Article
- Complex pedigrees in the sequencing era: to track transmissions or decorrelate?Genetic epidemiology · 2014Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
Family based association studies are employed less often than case-control designs in the search for disease-predisposing genes. The optimal statistical genetic approach for complex pedigrees is unclear when evaluating both common and rare variants. We examined the empirical power and type I error rates of 2 common approaches, the measured genotype approach and family-based association testing, through simulations from a set of multigenerational pedigrees. Overall, these results suggest that much larger sample sizes will be required for family-based studies and that power was better using MGA compared to FBAT. Taking into account computational time and potential bias, a 2-step strategy is recommended with FBAT followed by MGA.
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.