ArticleHuman heredity2015
Prioritizing rare variants with conditional likelihood ratios.
Article in Human heredity, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Identifying individual risk rare variants using protein structure guided local tests (POINT).PLoS computational biology · 2019Article
- The evidential statistical paradigm in genetics.Genetic epidemiology · 2018Review
- Illustrating, Quantifying, and Correcting for Bias in Post-hoc Analysis of Gene-Based Rare Variant Tests of Association.Frontiers in genetics · 2017Article
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
Abstract
backgroundPrioritizing individual rare variants within associated genes or regions often consists of an ad hoc combination of statistical and biological considerations. From the statistical perspective, rare variants are often ranked using Fisher's exact p values, which can lead to different rankings of the same set of variants depending on whether 1- or 2-sided p values are used.
resultsWe propose a likelihood ratio-based measure, maxLRc, for the statistical component of ranking rare variants under a case-control study design that avoids the hypothesis-testing paradigm. We prove analytically that the maxLRc is always well-defined, even when the data has zero cell counts in the 2×2 disease-variant table. Via simulation, we show that the maxLRc outperforms Fisher's exact p values in most practical scenarios considered. Using next-generation sequence data from 27 rolandic epilepsy cases and 200 controls in a region previously shown to be linked to and associated with rolandic epilepsy, we demonstrate that rankings assigned by the maxLRc and exact p values can differ substantially.
conclusionThe maxLRc provides reliable statistical prioritization of rare variants using only the observed data, avoiding the need to specify parameters associated with hypothesis testing that can result in ranking discrepancies across p value procedures; and it is applicable to common variant prioritization.
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.