Greenberg D A
Am J Hum Genet. 1986 Sep;39(3):329-39.
In many family studies, it is often difficult to know exactly how the families were ascertained. Even if known, the circumstances under which the families came to the attention of the study may violate the assumptions of classical ascertainment bias correction. The purpose of this work was to investigate the effect on segregation analysis of violations of the assumptions of the classical ascertainment model. We simulated family data generated under a simple recessive model of inheritance. We then ascertained families under different "scenarios." These scenarios were designed to simulate actual conditions under which families come to the attention of-and then interact with-a clinic or genetic study. We show that how one designates probands, which one must do under the classical ascertainment model, can influence parameter estimation and hypothesis testing. We demonstrate that, in some cases, there may be no "correct" way to designate probands. Further, we show that interactions within the family, the conditions under which the genetic study must function, and even social influences can have a profound effect on segregation analysis. We also propose a method for dealing with the ascertainment problem that is applicable to almost any study situation.
在许多家族研究中,往往很难确切知晓家族是如何被确定的。即便已知,家族引起研究关注的具体情形也可能违背经典确定偏倚校正的假设。这项工作的目的是研究违背经典确定模型假设对分离分析的影响。我们模拟了在简单隐性遗传模型下生成的家族数据。然后我们在不同的“情形”下确定家族。这些情形旨在模拟家族引起诊所或基因研究关注并与之相互作用的实际情况。我们表明,在经典确定模型下必须进行的先证者指定方式,会影响参数估计和假设检验。我们证明,在某些情况下,可能不存在指定先证者的“正确”方法。此外,我们表明家族内部的相互作用、基因研究必须运作的条件,甚至社会影响,都可能对分离分析产生深远影响。我们还提出了一种适用于几乎任何研究情形的处理确定问题的方法。