↓ Skip to main content

A simulation study investigating power estimates in phenome-wide association studies

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Bioinformatics, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (63rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
69 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
56 Mendeley
Title
A simulation study investigating power estimates in phenome-wide association studies
Published in
BMC Bioinformatics, April 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12859-018-2135-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anurag Verma, Yuki Bradford, Scott Dudek, Anastasia M. Lucas, Shefali S. Verma, Sarah A. Pendergrass, Marylyn D. Ritchie

Abstract

Phenome-wide association studies (PheWAS) are a high-throughput approach to evaluate comprehensive associations between genetic variants and a wide range of phenotypic measures. PheWAS has varying sample sizes for quantitative traits, and variable numbers of cases and controls for binary traits across the many phenotypes of interest, which can affect the statistical power to detect associations. The motivation of this study is to investigate the various parameters which affect the estimation of statistical power in PheWAS, including sample size, case-control ratio, minor allele frequency, and disease penetrance. We performed a PheWAS simulation study, where we investigated variations in statistical power based on different parameters, such as overall sample size, number of cases, case-control ratio, minor allele frequency, and disease penetrance. The simulation was performed on both binary and quantitative phenotypic measures. Our simulation on binary traits suggests that the number of cases has more impact on statistical power than the case to control ratio; also, we found that a sample size of 200 cases or more maintains the statistical power to identify associations for common variants. For quantitative traits, a sample size of 1000 or more individuals performed best in the power calculations. We focused on common genetic variants (MAF > 0.01) in this study; however, in future studies, we will be extending this effort to perform similar simulations on rare variants. This study provides a series of PheWAS simulation analyses that can be used to estimate statistical power for some potential scenarios. These results can be used to provide guidelines for appropriate study design for future PheWAS analyses.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Unknown 55 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 13%
Other 6 11%
Student > Postgraduate 5 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 5%
Other 8 14%
Unknown 16 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 13%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 4%
Social Sciences 2 4%
Other 7 13%
Unknown 18 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 January 2019.
All research outputs
#6,982,354
of 23,344,526 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#2,645
of 7,387 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#120,052
of 329,939 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#38
of 112 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,344,526 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,387 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 329,939 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 112 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.