ArticleGenetics research2016
Rare high-impact disease variants: properties and identifications.
Article in Genetics research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
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 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Although many genome-wide association studies have been performed, the identification of disease polymorphisms remains important. It is now suspected that many rare disease variants induce the association signal of common variants in linkage disequilibrium (LD). Based on recent development of genetic models, the current study provides explanations of the existence of rare variants with high impacts and common variants with low impacts. Disease variants are neither necessary nor sufficient due to gene-gene or gene-environment interactions. A new method was developed based on theoretical aspects to identify both rare and common disease variants by their genotypes. Common disease variants were identified with relatively small odds ratios and relatively small sample sizes, except for specific situations in which the disease variants were in strong LD with a variant with a higher frequency. Rare disease variants with small impacts were difficult to identify without increasing sample sizes; however, the method was reasonably accurate for rare disease variants with high impacts. For rare variants, dominant variants generally showed better Type II error rates than recessive variants; however, the trend was reversed for common variants. Type II error rates increased in gene regions containing more than two disease variants because the more common variant, rather than both disease variants, was usually identified. The proposed method would be useful for identifying common disease variants with small impacts and rare disease variants with large impacts when disease variants have the same effects on disease presentation.
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.