The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Detecting epistatic interactions contributing to quantitative traits
Abstract
The restricted partition method (RPM) is a partitioning algorithm for examining multi‐locus genotypes as (potentially non‐additive) predictors of a quantitative trait. The motivating application was to develop a robust method to examine quantitative phenotypes for epistasis (gene–gene interactions), but the method can be applied without modification to gene–environment interactions. Simulation results indicate that the method provides an efficient way to identify loci contributing epistatically to a quantitative trait, even if the loci have no single locus effects. Statistical significance can be estimated through permutation testing. An example using real data involving the metabolism of a chemotherapy drug is included for illustration. Although the examples in this article involve 2‐locus interactions, the RPM is computationally feasible for the analysis of more than two loci or factors. © 2004 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
MACDONALD, M. (1993) · Cell · doi:10.1016/0092-8674(93)90585-e · Cited by 8,366
Identification of the Cystic Fibrosis Gene: Cloning and Characterization of Complementary DNA
Riordan, J. R., Rommens, J. M., Kerem, B.-S., Alon, N., Rozmahel, R., Grzelczak, Z., Zielenski, J., Lok, S., Plavsic, N., Chou, J.-L., et al. (1989) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.2475911 · Cited by 7,418
Cross-national epidemiology of major depression and bipolar disorder
Weissman, M. M. (1996) · JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association · doi:10.1001/jama.1996.03540040037030 · Cited by 2,302
Meta-analysis of whole-genome linkage scans of bipolar disorder and schizophrenia
Badner, J. A., & Gershon, E. S. (2002) · Molecular Psychiatry · doi:10.1038/sj.mp.4001012 · Cited by 811
Suicidal behaviour: an epidemiological and genetic study
STATHAM, D. J., HEATH, A. C., MADDEN, P. A. F., BUCHOLZ, K. K., BIERUT, L., DINWIDDIE, S. H., SLUTSKE, W. S., DUNNE, M. P., & MARTIN, N. G. (1998) · Psychological Medicine · doi:10.1017/s0033291798006916 · Cited by 471
Cited by
Detecting gene–gene interactions that underlie human diseases
Cordell, H. J. (2009) · Nature Reviews Genetics · doi:10.1038/nrg2579 · Cited by 1,350
Prioritizing GWAS Results: A Review of Statistical Methods and Recommendations for Their Application
Cantor, R. M., Lange, K., & Sinsheimer, J. S. (2010) · The American Journal of Human Genetics · doi:10.1016/j.ajhg.2009.11.017 · Cited by 622
Lou, X.-Y., Chen, G.-B., Yan, L., Ma, J. Z., Zhu, J., Elston, R. C., & Li, M. D. (2007) · The American Journal of Human Genetics · doi:10.1086/518312 · Cited by 559
Moore, J. H., & Williams, S. M. (2005) · BioEssays · doi:10.1002/bies.20236 · Cited by 340
A random forest approach to the detection of epistatic interactions in case-control studies
Jiang, R., Tang, W., Wu, X., & Fu, W. (2009) · BMC Bioinformatics · doi:10.1186/1471-2105-10-s1-s65 · Cited by 306
Metadata
- Authors
- Culverhouse, R., Klein, T., & Shannon, W.
- Venue
- Genetic Epidemiology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2004-04-26
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 141-152
- ISSN
- 0741-0395 (ISSN-L)
- 1098-2272
- OpenAlex
- W2043192290
- Cited by
- 171
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 7.24
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
