Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26821800›Full record

ArticleBMC bioinformatics2016

A two-phase procedure for non-normal quantitative trait genetic association study.

Wei Zhang, Huiyun Li, Zhaohai Li, Qizhai Li

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC bioinformatics, 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

4 authors.

Wei ZhangKey Laboratory of Systems Control, Academy of Mathematics and Systems Science, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100190, China. zhangwei@amss.ac.cn.
Huiyun LiSchool of Management and Economics, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing, 100081, China. lihuiyun@bit.edu.cn.
Zhaohai LiDepartment of Statistics, George Washington University, Washington, 20052, DC, USA. zli@gwu.edu.
Qizhai LiKey Laboratory of Systems Control, Academy of Mathematics and Systems Science, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100190, China. liqz@amss.ac.cn.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe nonparametric trend test (NPT) is well suitable for identifying the genetic variants associated with quantitative traits when the trait values do not satisfy the normal distribution assumption. If the genetic model, defined according to the mode of inheritance, is known, the NPT derived under the given genetic model is optimal. However, in practice, the genetic model is often unknown beforehand. The NPT derived from an uncorrected model might result in loss of power. When the underlying genetic model is unknown, a robust test is preferred to maintain satisfactory power.

resultsWe propose a two-phase procedure to handle the uncertainty of the genetic model for non-normal quantitative trait genetic association study. First, a model selection procedure is employed to help choose the genetic model. Then the optimal test derived under the selected model is constructed to test for possible association. To control the type I error rate, we derive the joint distribution of the test statistics developed in the two phases and obtain the proper size.

conclusionsThe proposed method is more robust than existing methods through the simulation results and application to gene DNAH9 from the Genetic Analysis Workshop 16 for associated with Anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide antibody further demonstrate its performance.

Indexed as

Genetic Association StudiesModels, GeneticModels, StatisticalAutoantibodiesAxonemal DyneinsGenetic VariationHumansPeptides, CyclicPhenotypeAutoantibodiesAxonemal Dyneinscyclic citrullinated peptideDNAH9 protein, humanPeptides, Cyclic

Identifiers

PMID26821800
PMCPMC4730615

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.