ArticleMathematics (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Next-Generation Sequencing Data-Based Association Testing of a Group of Genetic Markers for Complex Responses Using a Generalized Linear Model Framework.
Article in Mathematics (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. 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.
- Next-Generation Sequencing Data-Based Association Testing of a Group of Genetic Markers for Complex Responses Using a Generalized Linear Model Framework.Mathematics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Association testing has been widely used to study the relationship between genetic variants and phenotypes. Most association testing methods are genotype-based, i.e. first estimate genotype and then regress phenotype on estimated genotype and other variables. Directly testing methods based on next generation sequencing (NGS) data without genotype calling have been proposed and shown advantage over genotype-based methods in the scenarios when genotype calling is not accurate. NGS data-based single-variant testing have been proposed including our previously proposed single-variant testing method, i.e. UNC combo method [1]. NGS data-based group testing methods for continuous phenotype have also been proposed by us using a linear model framework which can handle continuous responses [2]. In this paper, we extend our linear model-based framework to a generalized linear model-based framework so that the methods can handle other types of responses especially binary responses which is commonly-faced in association studies. We have conducted extensive simulation studies to evaluate the performance of different estimators and compare our estimators with their corresponding genotype-based methods. We found that all methods have Type I errors controlled, and our NGS data-based testing methods have better performance than their corresponding genotype-based methods in the literature for other types of responses including binary responses (logistic regression) and count responses (Poisson regression especially when sequencing depth is low. In conclusion, we have extended our previous linear model (LM) framework to a generalized linear model (GLM) framework and derived NGS data-based testing methods for a group of genetic variants. Compared with our previously proposed LM-based methods [2], the new GLM-based methods can handle more complex responses (for example, binary responses and count responses) in addition to continuous responses. Our methods have filled the literature gap and shown advantage over their corresponding genotype-based methods in the literature.
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.