Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 471

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Genetic association studies: Design, analysis and interpretation

Lewis, Cathryn M.·2002·Briefings in Bioinformatics

Abstract

This paper provides a review of the design and analysis of genetic association studies. In case control studies, the different contingency tables and their relationships to the underlying genetic model are defined. Population stratification is discussed, with suggested methods to identify and correct for the effect. The transmission disequilibrium test is provided as an alternative family-based test, which is robust to population stratification. The relative benefits of each analysis are summarised.

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 · 10.1093/bib/3.2.146

Cites

1 of 1 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 1 references

Cited by

See all 471

Metadata

Authors
Lewis, C. M.
Venue
Briefings in Bioinformatics
Published
2002-06-01
Volume
3
Issue
2
Pages
146-153
ISSN
  • 1467-5463 (ISSN-L)
  • 1477-4054
OpenAlex
W2036144540
Cited by
471
References
1
FWCI
2.67
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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Genetic association studies: Design, analysis and interpretation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/bib/3.2.146
The paper
Lewis, C. M. (2002). Genetic association studies: Design, analysis and interpretation. Briefings in Bioinformatics. https://doi.org/10.1093/bib/3.2.146

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.