Suppr超能文献

在不同家庭结构、缺失亲代数据和群体分层情况下,基于单核苷酸多态性传递/不平衡的统计方法的效能及I型错误评估。

An evaluation of power and type I error of single-nucleotide polymorphism transmission/disequilibrium-based statistical methods under different family structures, missing parental data, and population stratification.

作者信息

Nicodemus Kristin K, Luna Augustin, Shugart Yin Yao

机构信息

Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA.

出版信息

Am J Hum Genet. 2007 Jan;80(1):178-85. doi: 10.1086/510498. Epub 2006 Dec 7.

Abstract

Researchers conducting family-based association studies have a wide variety of transmission/disequilibrium (TD)-based methods to choose from, but few guidelines exist in the selection of a particular method to apply to available data. Using a simulation study design, we compared the power and type I error of eight popular TD-based methods under different family structures, frequencies of missing parental data, genetic models, and population stratifications. No method was uniformly most powerful under all conditions, but type I error was appropriate for nearly every test statistic under all conditions. Power varied widely across methods, with a 46.5% difference in power observed between the most powerful and the least powerful method when 50% of families consisted of an affected sib pair and one parent genotyped under an additive genetic model and a 35.2% difference when 50% of families consisted of a single affection-discordant sibling pair without parental genotypes available under an additive genetic model. Methods were generally robust to population stratification, although some slightly less so than others. The choice of a TD-based test statistic should be dependent on the predominant family structure ascertained, the frequency of missing parental genotypes, and the assumed genetic model.

摘要

开展基于家系的关联研究的科研人员有多种基于传递/不平衡(TD)的方法可供选择,但在选择适用于现有数据的特定方法时几乎没有相关指南。我们采用模拟研究设计,比较了八种常用的基于TD的方法在不同家系结构、缺失亲代数据的频率、遗传模型和群体分层情况下的检验效能和I型错误。在所有条件下,没有一种方法始终是检验效能最高的,但在所有条件下,几乎每个检验统计量的I型错误都是合适的。不同方法的检验效能差异很大,当50%的家系由一个患病同胞对和一个已分型亲代组成,且遗传模型为加性模型时,检验效能最高的方法与最低的方法之间相差46.5%;当50%的家系由一对性状不一致的同胞对组成且无亲代基因型信息,遗传模型为加性模型时,这一差异为35.2%。尽管有些方法对群体分层的稳健性略逊于其他方法,但总体而言这些方法对群体分层具有稳健性。基于TD的检验统计量的选择应取决于所确定的主要家系结构、缺失亲代基因型的频率以及假定的遗传模型。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

3
Demonstrating stratification in a European American population.在欧美人群中显示分层情况。
Nat Genet. 2005 Aug;37(8):868-72. doi: 10.1038/ng1607. Epub 2005 Jul 24.
4
Robustness of case-control studies to population stratification.
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2005 Jun;14(6):1579-80; author reply 1580-1. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-04-0935.
9
Haploview: analysis and visualization of LD and haplotype maps.Haploview:连锁不平衡(LD)和单倍型图谱的分析与可视化
Bioinformatics. 2005 Jan 15;21(2):263-5. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/bth457. Epub 2004 Aug 5.

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验