Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31388069›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2019

Population-specific long-range linkage disequilibrium in the human genome and its influence on identifying common disease variants.

Leeyoung Park

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Long-range linkage disequilibrium in French beef cattle breeds.Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE · 2021
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Leeyoung ParkNatural Science Research Institute, Yonsei University, Seoul, 120-749, Korea. lypark@yonsei.ac.kr.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite the availability of large-scale sequencing data, long-range linkage disequilibrium (LRLD) has not been extensively studied. The theoretical aspects of LRLD estimates were studied to determine the best estimation method for the sequencing data of three different populations of African (AFR), European (EUR), and East-Asian (EAS) descent from the 1000 Genomes Project. Genome-wide LRLDs excluding centromeric regions revealed clear population specificity, presenting substantially more population-specific LRLDs than coincident LRLDs. Clear relationships between the functionalities of the regions in LRLDs denoted long-range interactions in the genome. The proportions of gene regions were increased in LRLD variants, and the coding sequence (CDS)-CDS LRLDs showed obvious functional similarities between genes in LRLDs. Application to theoretical case-control associations confirmed that the LRLDs in genome-wide association studies (GWASs) could contribute to false signals, although the impacts might not be severe in most cases. LRLDs with variants with functional similarity exist in the human genome indicating possible gene-gene interactions, and they differ depending on populations. Based on the current study, LRLDs should be examined in GWASs to identify true signals. More importantly, population specificity in LRLDs should be examined in relevant studies.

Indexed as

Genome, HumanLinkage DisequilibriumModels, GeneticGenetics, PopulationGenome-Wide Association StudyGenomicsHumansPolymorphism, Genetic

Identifiers

PMID31388069
PMCPMC6684625

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.