ArticleBMC proceedings2016
Independent test assessment using the extreme value distribution theory.
Article in BMC proceedings, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Modeling methylation data as an additional genetic variance component.BMC proceedings · 2018Article
- Filtering genetic variants and placing informative priors based on putative biological function.BMC genetics · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 7 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
The new generation of whole genome sequencing platforms offers great possibilities and challenges for dissecting the genetic basis of complex traits. With a very high number of sequence variants, a naïve multiple hypothesis threshold correction hinders the identification of reliable associations by the overreduction of statistical power. In this report, we examine 2 alternative approaches to improve the statistical power of a whole genome association study to detect reliable genetic associations. The approaches were tested using the Genetic Analysis Workshop 19 (GAW19) whole genome sequencing data. The first tested method estimates the real number of effective independent tests actually being performed in whole genome association project by the use of an extreme value distribution and a set of phenotype simulations. Given the familiar nature of the GAW19 data and the finite number of pedigree founders in the sample, the number of correlations between genotypes is greater than in a set of unrelated samples. Using our procedure, we estimate that the effective number represents only 15 % of the total number of independent tests performed. However, even using this corrected significance threshold, no genome-wide significant association could be detected for systolic and diastolic blood pressure traits. The second approach implements a biological relevance-driven hypothesis tested by exploiting prior computational predictions on the effect of nonsynonymous genetic variants detected in a whole genome sequencing association study. This guided testing approach was able to identify 2 promising single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), 1 for each trait, targeting biologically relevant genes that could help shed light on the genesis of the human hypertension. The first gene,
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.