Evidence map›Paper›PMID 8213835›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of human genetics1993

Genotype relative risks: methods for design and analysis of candidate-gene association studies.

D J Schaid, S S Sommer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of human genetics, 1993. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 94 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
94citing papers in PubMed
–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

94 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Genetic epidemiology of neural tube defects.Journal of pediatric rehabilitation medicine · 2017
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

34 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

D J SchaidDepartment of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic/Foundation, Rochester, MN 55905.
S S Sommer

Funding

GENES OF THE CATECHOLAMINE SYSTEM &SCHIZOPHRENIAR01MH044276 · NIMH · MAYO CLINIC COLL OF MEDICINE, ROCHESTER · PI SOMMER, STEVE SEEV · 1989 to 1995
–
NHLBI NIH HHS HL07567NIMH NIH HHS MH44276
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Design and analysis methods are presented for studying the association of a candidate gene with a disease by using parental data in place of nonrelated controls. This alternative design eliminates spurious differences in allele frequencies between cases and nonrelated controls resulting from different ethnic origins and population stratification for these two groups. We present analysis methods which are based on two genetic relative risks: (1) the relative risk of disease for homozygotes with two copies of the candidate gene versus homozygotes without the candidate gene and (2) the relative risk for heterozygotes with one copy of the candidate gene versus homozygotes without the candidate gene. In addition to estimating the magnitude of these relative risks, likelihood methods allow specific hypotheses to be tested, namely, a test for overall association of the candidate gene with disease, as well as specific genetic hypotheses, such as dominant or recessive inheritance. Two likelihood methods are presented: (1) a likelihood method appropriate when Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium holds and (2) a likelihood method in which we condition on parental genotype data when Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium does not hold. The results for the relative efficiency of these two methods suggest that the conditional approach may at times be preferable, even when equilibrium holds. Sample-size and power calculations are presented for a multitiered design. The purpose of tier 1 is to detect the presence of an abnormal sequence for a postulated candidate gene among a small group of cases. The purpose of tier 2 is to test for association of the abnormal variant with disease, such as by the likelihood methods presented. The purpose of tier 3 is to confirm positive results from tier 2. Results indicate that required sample sizes are smaller when expression of disease is recessive, rather than dominant, and that, for recessive disease and large relative risks, necessary sample sizes may be feasible, even if only a small percentage of the disease can be attributed to the candidate gene.

Indexed as

GenotypeRiskGenetic Diseases, InbornHeterozygoteHomozygoteHumans

Identifiers

PMID8213835
PMCPMC1682319

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.