ArticlePloS one2018
Fast score test with global null estimation regardless of missing genotypes.
Article in PloS one, 2018. 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.
- Hsp90B enhances MAST1-mediated cisplatin resistance by protecting MAST1 from proteosomal degradation.The Journal of clinical investigation · 2019Article
- Lack of UGT polymorphism association with idasanutlin pharmacokinetics in solid tumor patients.Cancer chemotherapy and pharmacology · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In genome-wide association studies (GWASs) for binary traits (or case-control samples) in the presence of covariates to be adjusted for, researchers often use a logistic regression model to test variants for disease association. Popular tests include Wald, likelihood ratio, and score tests. For likelihood ratio test and Wald test, maximum likelihood estimation (MLE), which requires iterative procedure, must be computed for each single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP). In contrast, the score test only requires MLE under the null model, being lower in computational cost than other tests. Usually, genotype data include missing genotypes because of assay failures. It loses computational efficiency in the conventional score test (CST), which requires null estimation by excluding individuals with missing genotype for each SNP. In this study, we propose two new score tests, called PM1 and PM2, that use a single global null estimator for all SNPs regardless of missing genotypes, thereby enabling faster computation than CST. We prove that PM2 and CST have an equivalent asymptotic power and that the power of PM1 is asymptotically lower than that of PM2. We evaluate the performance of the proposed methods in terms of type I error rates and power by simulation studies and application to real GWAS data provided by the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI), confirming our theoretical results. ADNI-GWAS application demonstrated that the proposed score tests improve computational speed about 6-18 times faster than the existing tests, CST, Wald tests and likelihood ratio tests. Our score tests are general and applicable to other regression models.
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.