Cited by 1,001Genetic Associations and EpidemiologyGenetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and AnimalsGenetic diversity and population structure

Advantages and pitfalls in the application of mixed-model association methods

Open access
Yang, Jian, Zaitlen, Noah A, Goddard, Michael E, Visscher, Peter M, Price, Alkes L·2014·Nature Genetics

Abstract

Mixed linear models are emerging as a method of choice for conducting genetic association studies in humans and other organisms. The advantages of the mixed-linear-model association (MLMA) method include the prevention of false positive associations due to population or relatedness structure and an increase in power obtained through the application of a correction that is specific to this structure. An underappreciated point is that MLMA can also increase power in studies without sample structure by implicitly conditioning on associated loci other than the candidate locus. Numerous variations on the standard MLMA approach have recently been published, with a focus on reducing computational cost. These advances provide researchers applying MLMA methods with many options to choose from, but we caution that MLMA methods are still subject to potential pitfalls. Here we describe and quantify the advantages and pitfalls of MLMA methods as a function of study design and provide recommendations for the application of these methods in practical settings.

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 · 10.1038/ng.2876

Cites

42 of 42 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?

  • Analytical techniques including PCA and linear mixed models reduce population stratification confounding but often leave residual confounding in GWAS results.

    “Analytical techniques including principal component analysis (PCA) and linear mixed models have been developed to reduce population stratification confounding12, but these techniques often leave residual confounding in GWAS results5,8,10.”

    From Family-GWAS reveals effects of environment and mating on genetic associations (2024) · cites this paper as [12]

    The “Mixed model association methods prevent false-positive associations and increase power” section says mixed linear models address confounding from sample structure. The “Pitfall: using a small subset of markers in GRM” section shows that particular implementations can leave stratification insufficiently corrected. But the paper also describes correction as nearly perfect for common variants, so it does not support the broad claim that PCA and linear mixed models often leave residual confounding in GWAS results. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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
Yang, J., Zaitlen, N. A., Goddard, M. E., Visscher, P. M., & Price, A. L.
Affiliations
  • The University of Queensland (AU)
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
  • The University of Melbourne (AU)
  • Broad Institute (US)
Corresponding author
  • Visscher, Peter M
  • Price, Alkes L
Venue
Nature Genetics
Published
2014-01-29
Volume
46
Issue
2
Pages
100-106
ISSN
  • 1061-4036 (ISSN-L)
  • 1546-1718
OpenAlex
W2090075367
Cited by
981
References
42
Citations by year
2026: 66 · 2025: 85 · 2024: 83 · 2023: 84 · 2022: 108 · 2021: 93 · 2020: 85 · 2019: 85 · 2018: 88 · 2017: 78 · 2016: 63 · 2015: 38 · 2014: 24 · 2013: 1
FWCI
44.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Genetics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • Wellcome Trust
  • National Institutes of Health
  • Medical Research Council
  • National Human Genome Research Institute (R01HG006399)
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (P01GM099568, R01GM075091)
  • National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (T32ES007142)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Associations and Epidemiology
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and Animals
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic diversity and population structure
Keywords
genetic association studies, population structure, false positive association, statistical power, conditional analysis, research design, computational cost
MeSH terms
Colitis, Ulcerative, Computer Simulation, Humans, Multiple Sclerosis, Research Design, Linear Models, Genetic Association Studies

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