ArticleBMC genomics2024
Evaluation of Bayesian Linear Regression derived gene set test methods.
Article in BMC genomics, 2024. 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.
- mLeveraging genetic correlations to prioritize drug groups for repurposing in type 2 diabetes.The pharmacogenomics journal · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundGene set tests can pinpoint genes and biological pathways that exert small to moderate effects on complex diseases like Type 2 Diabetes (T2D). By aggregating genetic markers based on biological information, these tests can enhance the statistical power needed to detect genetic associations.
resultsOur goal was to develop a gene set test utilizing Bayesian Linear Regression (BLR) models, which account for both linkage disequilibrium (LD) and the complex genetic architectures intrinsic to diseases, thereby increasing the detection power of genetic associations. Through a series of simulation studies, we demonstrated how the efficacy of BLR derived gene set tests is influenced by several factors, including the proportion of causal markers, the size of gene sets, the percentage of genetic variance explained by the gene set, and the genetic architecture of the traits. By using KEGG pathways, eQTLs, and regulatory elements as different kinds of gene sets with T2D results, we also assessed the performance of gene set tests in explaining more about real phenotypes.
conclusionsComparing our method with other approaches, such as the gold standard MAGMA (Multi-marker Analysis of Genomic Annotation) approach, our BLR gene set test showed superior performance. Combining performance of our method in simulated and real phenotypes, this suggests that our BLR-based approach could more accurately identify genes and biological pathways underlying complex diseases.
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.