ArticleScientific reports2019
Joint Analysis of Multiple Phenotypes in Association Studies based on Cross-Validation Prediction Error.
Article in Scientific reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Simultaneous modeling of multivariate heterogeneous responses and heteroskedasticity via a two-stage composite likelihood.Biometrical journal. Biometrische Zeitschrift · 2023Article
- Article
- Multivariate Analysis and Modelling of multiple Brain endOphenotypes: Let's MAMBO!Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2021Review
- Joint analysis of multiple phenotypes using a clustering linear combination method based on hierarchical clustering.Genetic epidemiology · 2020Article
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 (GWAS), joint analysis of multiple phenotypes could have increased statistical power over analyzing each phenotype individually to identify genetic variants that are associated with complex diseases. With this motivation, several statistical methods that jointly analyze multiple phenotypes have been developed, such as O'Brien's method, Trait-based Association Test that uses Extended Simes procedure (TATES), multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA), and joint model of multiple phenotypes (MultiPhen). However, the performance of these methods under a wide range of scenarios is not consistent: one test may be powerful in some situations, but not in the others. Thus, one challenge in joint analysis of multiple phenotypes is to construct a test that could maintain good performance across different scenarios. In this article, we develop a novel statistical method to test associations between a genetic variant and Multiple Phenotypes based on cross-validation Prediction Error (MultP-PE). Extensive simulations are conducted to evaluate the type I error rates and to compare the power performance of MultP-PE with various existing methods. The simulation studies show that MultP-PE controls type I error rates very well and has consistently higher power than the tests we compared in all simulation scenarios. We conclude with the recommendation for the use of MultP-PE for its good performance in association studies with multiple phenotypes.
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.