SynthesisGenetic epidemiology2021
Statistical approaches for meta-analysis of genetic mutation prevalence.
Synthesis in Genetic epidemiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Multifactorial Rare Diseases: Can Uncertainty Analysis Bring Added Value to the Search for Risk Factors and Etiopathogenesis?Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2021Review
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Estimating the prevalence of rare germline genetic mutations in the general population is of interest as it can inform genetic counseling and risk management. Most studies that estimate the prevalence of mutations are performed in high-risk populations, and each study is designed with differing inclusion criteria, resulting in ascertained populations. Quantifying the effects of ascertainment is necessary to estimate the prevalence in the general population. This quantification is difficult as the inclusion criteria is often based on disease status and/or family history. Combining estimates from multiple studies through a meta-analysis is challenging due to the variety of study designs and ascertainment mechanisms as well as the complexity of quantifying the effect of these mechanisms. We provide guidelines on how to quantify the ascertainment mechanism for a wide range of settings and propose a general approach for conducting a meta-analysis in these complex settings by incorporating study-specific ascertainment mechanisms into a joint likelihood function. We implement the proposed likelihood-based approach using both frequentist and Bayesian methodologies. We evaluate these approaches in simulations and show that the methods are robust and produce unbiased estimates of the prevalence. An advantage of the Bayesian approach is that it can easily incorporate uncertainty in ascertainment probability values. We apply our methods to estimate the prevalence of PALB2 mutations in the United States by combining data from multiple studies and obtain a prevalence estimate of around 0.02%.
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.