SynthesisGenetic epidemiology2016
A meta-analytic framework for detection of genetic interactions.
Synthesis in Genetic epidemiology, 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.
- Embracing study heterogeneity for finding genetic interactions in large-scale research consortia.Genetic epidemiology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
With varying, but substantial, proportions of heritability remaining unexplained by summaries of single-SNP genetic variation, there is a demand for methods that extract maximal information from genetic association studies. One source of variation that is difficult to assess is genetic interactions. A major challenge for naive detection methods is the large number of possible combinations, with a requisite need to correct for multiple testing. Assumptions of large marginal effects, to reduce the search space, may be restrictive and miss higher order interactions with modest marginal effects. In this paper, we propose a new procedure for detecting gene-by-gene interactions through heterogeneity in estimated low-order (e.g., marginal) effect sizes by leveraging population structure, or ancestral differences, among studies in which the same phenotypes were measured. We implement this approach in a meta-analytic framework, which offers numerous advantages, such as robustness and computational efficiency, and is necessary when data-sharing limitations restrict joint analysis. We effectively apply a dimension reduction procedure that scales to allow searches for higher order interactions. For comparison to our method, which we term phylogenY-aware Effect-size Tests for Interactions (YETI), we adapt an existing method that assumes interacting loci will exhibit strong marginal effects to our meta-analytic framework. As expected, YETI excels when multiple studies are from highly differentiated populations and maintains its superiority in these conditions even when marginal effects are small. When these conditions are less extreme, the advantage of our method wanes. We assess the Type-I error and power characteristics of complementary approaches to evaluate their strengths and limitations.
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.