ArticleInternational journal of legal medicine2017
Combined effects of multiple linked loci on pairwise sibling tests.
Article in International journal of legal medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The advanced multiplex STR system, PowerPlex Fusion, includes four linked locus pairs. The conventional Identifiler system has one pair of linked loci. Therefore, sibling tests conducted using the advanced system might be more affected by linkage than those conducted using the conventional system. This study simulated single and combined effects of the four linked locus pairs on pairwise sibling tests. Simulated genotypes of 100,000 pairs of full siblings and nonrelatives were constructed according to allele frequencies of the Japanese population. The single linkage effect was evaluated for simulated genotype data by calculating both the likelihood ratio accounting for the linkage between two loci and the likelihood ratio ignoring the linkage. The combined effect was obtained by multiplication of the respective single effects. Furthermore, we investigated the possibility that ignoring the linkage affects subject classification by introducing a scale of the likelihood ratio into sibling tests. The single effect in the Identifiler analysis was 0.645-1.746 times if the linkage was ignored. Overestimations and underestimations were predictable from the identical-by-state status at two linked loci. The combined effect in the PowerPlex Fusion analysis was 0.217-7.390 times. Ignoring the linkage rarely caused a false conclusive or inconclusive result, even from PowerPlex Fusion analysis. Application of the advanced system improved sibling tests considerably. The additional examined loci were more beneficial than the adverse effect of the linkage derived from the four linked locus pairs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27878372What 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.