ArticleBioinformatics (Oxford, England)2017
Novel probabilistic models of spatial genetic ancestry with applications to stratification correction in genome-wide association studies.
Article in Bioinformatics (Oxford, England), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Geographical classification of malaria parasites through applying machine learning to whole genome sequence data.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Article
- Association of NOD2 and IFNG single nucleotide polymorphisms with leprosy in the Amazon ethnic admixed population.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2020Article
- Human ancestry indentification under resource constraints -- what can one chromosome tell us about human biogeographical ancestry?BMC medical genomics · 2018Article
- Population Stratification in Genetic Association Studies.Current protocols in human genetics · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Motivation: Genetic variation in human populations is influenced by geographic ancestry due to spatial locality in historical mating and migration patterns. Spatial population structure in genetic datasets has been traditionally analyzed using either model-free algorithms, such as principal components analysis (PCA) and multidimensional scaling, or using explicit spatial probabilistic models of allele frequency evolution. We develop a general probabilistic model and an associated inference algorithm that unify the model-based and data-driven approaches to visualizing and inferring population structure. Our spatial inference algorithm can also be effectively applied to the problem of population stratification in genome-wide association studies (GWAS), where hidden population structure can create fictitious associations when population ancestry is correlated with both the genotype and the trait. Results: Our algorithm Geographic Ancestry Positioning (GAP) relates local genetic distances between samples to their spatial distances, and can be used for visually discerning population structure as well as accurately inferring the spatial origin of individuals on a two-dimensional continuum. On both simulated and several real datasets from diverse human populations, GAP exhibits substantially lower error in reconstructing spatial ancestry coordinates compared to PCA. We also develop an association test that uses the ancestry coordinates inferred by GAP to accurately account for ancestry-induced correlations in GWAS. Based on simulations and analysis of a dataset of 10 metabolic traits measured in a Northern Finland cohort, which is known to exhibit significant population structure, we find that our method has superior power to current approaches. Availability and Implementation: Our software is available at https://github.com/anand-bhaskar/gap . Contacts: abhaskar@stanford.edu or ajavanma@usc.edu. Supplementary information: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.
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.