ArticleAnnals of human genetics2018
Decomposing Pearson's χ
Article in Annals of human genetics, 2018. 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.
- Efficacy of traditional Chinese medicineFrontiers in medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Factors associated with the reporting quality of low back pain systematic review abstracts in physical therapy: a methodological study.Brazilian journal of physical therapyPooled it
- Article
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
In case-control genetic association studies, a standard practice is to perform the Cochran-Armitage (CA) trend test under the assumption of the additive model because of its robustness. We could even identify situations in which it outperformed the analysis model consistent with the underlying inheritance mode. In this article, we analytically reveal the statistical basis that leads to the phenomenon. By elucidating the origin of the CA trend test as a linear regression model, we decompose Pearson's χ
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.