ArticleStatistical applications in genetics and molecular biology2015
On the validity of within-nuclear-family genetic association analysis in samples of extended families.
Article in Statistical applications in genetics and molecular biology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Risk of Transmission of Genetic Prion Diseases is Greater Than 50.European journal of neurology · 2025Article
- Polyunphased: an extension to polytomous outcomes of the Unphased package for family-based genetic association analysis.Statistical applications in genetics and molecular biology · 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
2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Splitting extended families into their component nuclear families to apply a genetic association method designed for nuclear families is a widespread practice in familial genetic studies. Dependence among genotypes and phenotypes of nuclear families from the same extended family arises because of genetic linkage of the tested marker with a risk variant or because of familial specificity of genetic effects due to gene-environment interaction. This raises concerns about the validity of inference conducted under the assumption of independence of the nuclear families. We indeed prove theoretically that, in a conditional logistic regression analysis applicable to disease cases and their genotyped parents, the naive model-based estimator of the variance of the coefficient estimates underestimates the true variance. However, simulations with realistic effect sizes of risk variants and variation of this effect from family to family reveal that the underestimation is negligible. The simulations also show the greater efficiency of the model-based variance estimator compared to a robust empirical estimator. Our recommendation is therefore, to use the model-based estimator of variance for inference on effects of genetic variants.
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.