Evidence map›Paper›PMID 9497238›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of human genetics1998

Significance levels in complex inheritance.

N E Morton

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of human genetics, 1998. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 47 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
47citing 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

47 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Child and adolescent psychiatric genetics.European child & adolescent psychiatry · 2010
    Review
  8. Genome-wide linkage analysis for uric acid in families enriched for hypertension.Nephrology, dialysis, transplantation : official publication of the European Dialysis and Transplant Association - European Renal Association · 2009
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Genetic aspects in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder.Journal of neural transmission (Vienna, Austria : 1996) · 2008
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Inherited, familial and sporadic primary open-angle glaucoma.Journal of the National Medical Association · 2007
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

  • Erratum issued
5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

N E MortonHuman Genetics, University of Southampton, Anne Hospital, Southampton, United Kingdom. nem@soton.ac.uk

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A LOD score >=3 is necessary but not sufficient to make a linkage test reliable, and this applies to complex inheritance as well as to major loci. Factors that affect this threshold are considered here. A LOD score as small as 2 is suggestive but is unreliable except as confirmation of either a significant linkage or a strong candidate locus. A threshold as great as 4 is unnecessarily conservative if multipoint tests are used sensibly. Marker density is not a major factor, and biases in the evaluation of LOD scores-especially inadequate allowance for estimation of nuisance parameters in multiple models-are paramount. Allelic association increases resolution for oligogenes within a candidate region and remains the only practical method to locate polygenes. The method sketched here combines multipoint linkage and allelic association to test efficiently for a regional candidate locus.

Indexed as

Genetic LinkageLod ScoreAllelesGenetic MarkersHumansGenetic Markers

Identifiers

PMID9497238
PMCPMC1376937

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.