ArticleJournal of human genetics2015
Evaluation of a two-step iterative resampling procedure for internal validation of genome-wide association studies.
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 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Circulating prostasin is an independent marker of mortality risk in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis.ERJ open research · 2025Article
- Identification and validation of a threshold for early posttransplant bronchoalveolar fluid hyaluronan that distinguishes lung recipients at risk for chronic lung allograft dysfunction.The Journal of heart and lung transplantation : the official publication of the International Society for Heart Transplantation · 2025Article
- The association between prescription drugs and colorectal cancer prognosis: a nationwide cohort study using a medication-wide association study.BMC cancer · 2023Article
- Proteomic Profiles of Body Mass Index and Waist-to-Hip Ratio and Their Role in Incidence of Diabetes.The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism · 2022Article
- A multivariant recall-by-genotype study of the metabolomic signature of BMI.Obesity (Silver Spring, Md.) · 2022Article
- A polygenic score for acute vaso-occlusive pain in pediatric sickle cell disease.Blood advances · 2021Article
- Variable selection in social-environmental data: sparse regression and tree ensemble machine learning approaches.BMC medical research methodology · 2020Article
- Article
- Find the Needle in the Haystack, Then Find It Again: Replication and Validation in the 'Omics Era.Metabolites · 2020Review
- A common polymorphism in the retinoic acid pathway modifies adrenocortical carcinoma age-dependent incidence.British journal of cancer · 2020Article
- Views on GWAS statistical analysis.Bioinformation · 2020Article
- Effect Declines Are Systematic, Strong, and Ubiquitous: A Meta-Meta-Analysis of the Decline Effect in Intelligence Research.Frontiers in psychology · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have successfully identified many common genetic variants associated with complex diseases over the past decade. The 'gold standard' method for validating the top single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) identified in GWAS is to independently replicate the findings in similar or diverse large-scale external cohorts. However, for rare diseases, it can be difficult to find an external validation cohort within a reasonable timeframe. In such situations, resampling methods, such as the two-step iterative resampling (TSIR) approach have been used to identify SNPs associated with the outcome of interest. However, the TSIR approach involves choosing several parameters in each step, which can influence the performance of the approach. In this paper, we undertook extensive simulation studies to assess the effect of choice of different parameters on the type I error and power for both binary and continuous phenotypes and also compared the TSIR approach with the traditional one-stage (OS) and two-stage (TS) GWAS analysis. We illustrate the usefulness of the TSIR approach by applying it to a GWAS of childhood cancer survivors. Our results indicate that the TSIR approach with an at least 70:30 split and a cutoff of discovering and replicating SNPs at least 20 times in 100 replications provides conservative type I error control and has near 'optimal' power for internally validated SNPs. Its performance is comparable with the TS GWAS for which an external validation cohort is available with only slight reduction in power in some situations. It has almost the same power as OS GWAS with conservative type I error which leads to fewer false positive findings. TSIR is a powerful and efficient method for identifying and internally validating SNPs for GWAS when independent cohorts for external validation may not be available.
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.