ArticleBioinformatics (Oxford, England)2017
FOLD: a method to optimize power in meta-analysis of genetic association studies with overlapping subjects.
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 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- PASTRY: achieving balanced power for detecting risk and protective minor alleles in meta-analysis of association studies with overlapping subjects.BMC bioinformatics · 2024Pooled it
- Meta-analysis of SNP-environment interaction with heterogeneity for overlapping data.Scientific reports · 2021Pooled it
- Meta-analysis of set-based multiple phenotype association test based on GWAS summary statistics from different cohorts.Frontiers in genetics · 2024Article
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
motivationIn genetic association studies, meta-analyses are widely used to increase the statistical power by aggregating information from multiple studies. In meta-analyses, participating studies often share the same individuals due to the shared use of publicly available control data or accidental recruiting of the same subjects. As such overlapping can inflate false positive rate, overlapping subjects are traditionally split in the studies prior to meta-analysis, which requires access to genotype data and is not always possible. Fortunately, recently developed meta-analysis methods can systematically account for overlapping subjects at the summary statistics level.
resultsWe identify and report a phenomenon that these methods for overlapping subjects can yield low power. For instance, in our simulation involving a meta-analysis of five studies that share 20% of individuals, whereas the traditional splitting method achieved 80% power, none of the new methods exceeded 32% power. We found that this low power resulted from the unaccounted differences between shared and unshared individuals in terms of their contributions towards the final statistic. Here, we propose an optimal summary-statistic-based method termed as FOLD that increases the power of meta-analysis involving studies with overlapping subjects. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: Our method is available at http://software.buhmhan.com/FOLD. CONTACT: mail: buhm.han@amc.seoul.kr. 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.