ArticleGenetic epidemiology2021
Testing and estimation of X-chromosome SNP effects: Impact of model assumptions.
Article in Genetic epidemiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sirenian genomes illuminate the evolution of fully aquatic species within the mammalian superorder afrotheria.Nature communications · 2024Article
- eXclusionarY: 10 years later, where are the sex chromosomes in GWASs?American journal of human genetics · 2023Review
- Review
- HostSeq: a Canadian whole genome sequencing and clinical data resource.BMC genomic data · 2023Article
- Article
- Genetic Modeling and Genomic Analyses of Yearling Temperament in American Angus Cattle and Its Relationship With Productive Efficiency and Resilience Traits.Frontiers in genetics · 2022Article
- The X factor: A robust and powerful approach to X-chromosome-inclusive whole-genome association studies.Genetic epidemiology · 2021Article
- Testing and estimation of X-chromosome SNP effects: Impact of model assumptions.Genetic epidemiology · 2021Article
- Analysis of Selected Variants ofGenes · 2021Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Interest in analyzing X chromosome single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) is growing and several approaches have been proposed. Prior studies have compared power of different approaches, but bias and interpretation of coefficients have received less attention. We performed simulations to demonstrate the impact of X chromosome model assumptions on effect estimates. We investigated the coefficient biases of SNP and sex effects with commonly used models for X chromosome SNPs, including models with and without assumptions of X chromosome inactivation (XCI), and with and without SNP-sex interaction terms. Sex and SNP coefficient biases were observed when assumptions made about XCI and sex differences in SNP effect in the analysis model were inconsistent with the data-generating model. However, including a SNP-sex interaction term often eliminated these biases. To illustrate these findings, estimates under different genetic model assumptions are compared and interpreted in a real data example. Models to analyze X chromosome SNPs make assumptions beyond those made in autosomal variant analysis. Assumptions made about X chromosome SNP effects should be stated clearly when reporting and interpreting X chromosome associations. Fitting models with SNP × Sex interaction terms can avoid reliance on assumptions, eliminating coefficient bias even in the absence of sex differences in SNP effect.
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.