Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 516

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Genomic Control, a New Approach to Genetic-Based Association Studies

Open access
Devlin, B, Roeder, Kathryn, Wasserman, Larry·2001·Theoretical Population Biology

Abstract

During the past decade, mutations affecting liability to human disease have been discovered at a phenomenal rate, and that rate is increasing. For the most part, however, those diseases have a relatively simple genetic basis. For diseases with a complex genetic and environmental basis, new approaches are needed to pave the way for more rapid discovery of genes affecting liability. One such approach exploits large, population-based samples and large-scale genotyping to evaluate disease/gene associations. A substantial drawback to such samples is the fact that population heterogeneity can induce spurious associations between genes and disease. We describe a method called genomic control (GC), which obviates many of the concerns about population substructure by using the features of the genomes present in the sample to correct for stratification. Two such approaches are now available. The GC approach exploits the fact that population substructure generate "overdispersion" of statistics used to assess association. By testing multiple polymorphisms throughout the genome, only some of which are pertinent to the disease of interest, the degree of overdispersion generated by population substructure can be estimated and taken into account. The other approach, called Structured Association (SA), assumes that the sampled population, while heterogeneous, is composed of subpopulations that are themselves homogeneous. By using multiple polymorphisms throughout the genome, SA probabilistically assigns sampled individuals to these latent subpopulations. We review in detail the overdispersion GC. In addition to outlining the published ideas on this method, we describe several extensions: quantitative trait studies and case-control studies with haplotypes and multiallelic markers. For each study design our goal is to achieve control similar to that obtained for a family-based study, but with the convenience found in a population-based design.

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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1006/tpbi.2001.1542

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

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

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

Show all 6 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Devlin, B., Roeder, K., & Wasserman, L.
Venue
Theoretical Population Biology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2001-11
Volume
60
Issue
3
Pages
155-166
ISSN
0040-5809 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1996570221
Cited by
516
References
6
FWCI
7.94
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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.