Cited by 636Genetic Associations and EpidemiologyGenomics and Rare DiseasesGenetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and Animals

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 64 of the 65 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Searching for missing heritability: Designing rare variant association studies

Open access

Abstract

Significance: Discovering the genetic basis of common diseases, such as diabetes, heart disease, and schizophrenia, is a key goal in biomedicine. Genomic studies have revealed thousands of common genetic variants underlying disease, but these variants explain only a portion of the heritability. Rare variants are also likely to play an important role, but few examples are known thus far, and initial discovery efforts with small sample sizes have had only limited success. In this paper, we describe an analytical framework for the design of rare variant association studies of disease. It provides guidance with respect to sample size, as well as the roles of selection, disruptive and missense alleles, gene-specific allele frequency thresholds, isolated populations, gene sets, and coding vs. noncoding regions.

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 · 10.1073/pnas.1322563111

Cites

64 of 64 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

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.

Citations

Cites

Show all 65 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 401–500 of 636

Metadata

Authors
Zuk, O., Schaffner, S. F., Samocha, K., Do, R., Hechter, E., Kathiresan, S., Daly, M. J., Neale, B. M., Sunyaev, S. R., & Lander, E. S.
Affiliations
Broad Institute (US)
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
2014-01-17
Volume
111
Issue
4
Pages
E455-64
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W1986818660
Cited by
635
References
65
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 36 · 2023: 40 · 2022: 35 · 2021: 64 · 2020: 41 · 2019: 59 · 2018: 52 · 2017: 71 · 2016: 86 · 2015: 70 · 2014: 48
FWCI
59.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DSpace@MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
Funders
National Human Genome Research Institute (U54HG003067)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Associations and Epidemiology
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genomics and Rare Diseases
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and Animals
Keywords
missing heritability, research design, sample size, isolated populations, gene set analysis, de novo mutations, selection coefficients, replication
MeSH terms
Gene Frequency, Humans, Mutation, Genetic Variation, Genetic Predisposition to Disease, 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