Cited by 105Genetic Associations and EpidemiologyGenetic and phenotypic traits in livestockGenetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and Animals

A comparison of approaches to account for uncertainty in analysis of imputed genotypes

Open access
Zheng, Jin, Li, Yun, Abecasis, Gonçalo R., Scheet, Paul·2011·Genetic Epidemiology

Abstract

The availability of extensively genotyped reference samples, such as "The HapMap" and 1,000 Genomes Project reference panels, together with advances in statistical methodology, have allowed for the imputation of genotypes at single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) markers that are untyped in a cohort or case-control study. These imputation procedures facilitate the interpretation and meta-analyses of genome-wide association studies. A natural question when implementing these procedures concerns how best to take into account uncertainty in imputed genotypes. Here we compare the performance of the following three strategies: least-squares regression on the "best-guess" imputed genotype; regression on the expected genotype score or "dosage"; and mixture regression models that more fully incorporate posterior probabilities of genotypes at untyped SNPs. Using simulation, we considered a range of sample sizes, minor allele frequencies, and imputation accuracies to compare the performance of the different methods under various genetic models. The mixture models performed the best in the setting of a large genetic effect and low imputation accuracies. However, for most realistic settings, we find that regressing the phenotype on the estimated allelic or genotypic dosage provides an attractive compromise between accuracy and computational tractability.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/gepi.20552

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Zheng, J., Li, Y., Abecasis, G. R., & Scheet, P.
Affiliations
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
  • University of Michigan (US)
Corresponding author
  • Li, Yun
  • Scheet, Paul
Venue
Genetic Epidemiology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2011-01-19
Volume
35
Issue
2
Pages
102-110
ISSN
  • 0741-0395 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-2272
OpenAlex
W2124768193
Cited by
105
References
24
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 13
FWCI
9.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Genetic Epidemiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Carolina Digital Repository (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill) (submittedVersion)
  • Deep Blue (University of Michigan) (submittedVersion)
  • UNC Libraries
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (CA082659)
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (U01HL084729)
  • National Human Genome Research Institute
  • National Cancer Institute (3-R01-CA082659-11S1, R01CA082659)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Associations and Epidemiology
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic and phenotypic traits in livestock
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and Animals
Keywords
genotype imputation, mixture regression models, imputation accuracy, genome-wide association study, single nucleotide polymorphisms, minor allele frequency
MeSH terms
Computer Simulation, Data Interpretation, Statistical, Genotype, Humans, Phenotype, Regression Analysis, Software, Reproducibility of Results, Models, Statistical, Cohort Studies, Molecular Epidemiology, Uncertainty, Genome-Wide Association Study

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