Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26781556›Full record

ArticleBMC genetics2016

Testing association and maternally mediated genetic effects with the principal component analysis in case-parents studies.

Yumei Li, Yang Xiang

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC genetics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Yumei LiSchool of Mathematics and Computational Science, Huaihua University, Huaihua, Hunan, 418008, P. R. China. liym74@yahoo.com.
Yang XiangSchool of Mathematics and Computational Science, Huaihua University, Huaihua, Hunan, 418008, P. R. China. xymail@126.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMajor advances in genotyping technology have generated high-density maps of single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) markers that provide an unprecedented opportunity to identify genes underlying complex traits. Several family-based statistical methods showing robust population stratification have been developed to test the association between multiple markers and disease-susceptibility genes. Only a few methods focus on testing for maternally mediated genetic effects, which is a critical risk for birth defects. The present study focuses on testing for association and maternally mediated genetic effects with family-based methods.

resultsIn the present study, we proposed a new method, max_PC integrating principal component analysis, to test association or maternally mediated genetic effects with case-parent data. The proposed method only uses the genotypes of case-parents triads and accommodates missing SNP data. Our results demonstrated that this method is powerful to test association or maternally mediated genetic effects and attractive because it provides a tool for testing the null hypothesis of no association and no maternally mediated genetic effects. Simulations with the permutation procedure as well as an application in the Crohn's disease study showed that the type I error rates of the proposed statistic were nominal with slightly higher power as compared to those of the max_Z(2) test.

conclusionsWe conclude that the max_PC is a good approach to test association or maternally mediated genetic effects.

Indexed as

Genetic Association StudiesGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseMothersComputer SimulationCrohn DiseaseFamilyFathersFemaleGenotypeHumansMalePolymorphism, Single NucleotidePrincipal Component Analysis

Identifiers

PMID26781556
PMCPMC4717828

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.