ArticleGenetic epidemiology2015
Principal component regression and linear mixed model in association analysis of structured samples: competitors or complements?
Article in Genetic epidemiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
31 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- A large genome-wide association study of QT interval length utilizing electronic health records.Genetics · 2022Pooled it
- Population genetic considerations for using biobanks as international resources in the pandemic era and beyond.BMC genomics · 2021Pooled it
- Within-sibling attenuation of polygenic risk score accuracy: investigating the effects of principal component analysis, LD score regression, and mixed model association in the UK Biobank.Human genetics · 2026Article
- Deciphering and targeting oncogenic pathways through integrated approaches and amino acid metabolism in hematologic malignancies.Discover oncology · 2025Review
- Quantile-specific confounding: correction for subtle population stratification via quantile regression.Genetics · 2025Article
- Article
- A Litmus Test for Confounding in Polygenic Scores.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- A cross-trait study of lung cancer and its related respiratory diseases based on large-scale exome sequencing population.Translational lung cancer research · 2024Article
- Bayesian LASSO for population stratification correction in rare haplotype association studies.Statistical applications in genetics and molecular biology · 2024Article
- GENERALIZED MATRIX DECOMPOSITION REGRESSION: ESTIMATION AND INFERENCE FOR TWO-WAY STRUCTURED DATA.The annals of applied statistics · 2023Article
- Strategies for the Genomic Analysis of Admixed Populations.Annual review of biomedical data science · 2023Review
- Limitations of principal components in quantitative genetic association models for human studies.eLife · 2023Article
- MATS: a novel multi-ancestry transcriptome-wide association study to account for heterogeneity in the effects of cis-regulated gene expression on complex traits.Human molecular genetics · 2023Article
- Genome-wide association with footrot in hair and wool sheep.Frontiers in genetics · 2023Article
- Phenotypes associated with genetic determinants of type I interferon regulation in the UK Biobank: a protocol.Wellcome open research · 2023Article
- Genes, exposures, and interactions on preterm birth risk: an exploratory study in an Argentine population.Journal of community genetics · 2022Article
- Including diverse and admixed populations in genetic epidemiology research.Genetic epidemiology · 2022Article
- Identifying alcohol misuse biotypes from neural connectivity markers and concurrent genetic associations.Translational psychiatry · 2022Article
- Genetics of Base Coat Colour Variations and Coat Colour-Patterns of the South African Nguni Cattle Investigated Using High-Density SNP Genotypes.Frontiers in genetics · 2022Article
- Controlling for human population stratification in rare variant association studies.Scientific reports · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have been established as a major tool to identify genetic variants associated with complex traits, such as common diseases. However, GWAS may suffer from false positives and false negatives due to confounding population structures, including known or unknown relatedness. Another important issue is unmeasured environmental risk factors. Among many methods for adjusting for population structures, two approaches stand out: one is principal component regression (PCR) based on principal component analysis, which is perhaps the most popular due to its early appearance, simplicity, and general effectiveness; the other is based on a linear mixed model (LMM) that has emerged recently as perhaps the most flexible and effective, especially for samples with complex structures as in model organisms. As shown previously, the PCR approach can be regarded as an approximation to an LMM; such an approximation depends on the number of the top principal components (PCs) used, the choice of which is often difficult in practice. Hence, in the presence of population structure, the LMM appears to outperform the PCR method. However, due to the different treatments of fixed vs. random effects in the two approaches, we show an advantage of PCR over LMM: in the presence of an unknown but spatially confined environmental confounder (e.g., environmental pollution or lifestyle), the PCs may be able to implicitly and effectively adjust for the confounder whereas the LMM cannot. Accordingly, to adjust for both population structures and nongenetic confounders, we propose a hybrid method combining the use and, thus, strengths of PCR and LMM. We use real genotype data and simulated phenotypes to confirm the above points, and establish the superior performance of the hybrid method across all scenarios.
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.