↓ Skip to main content
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
f1000
1 research highlight platform

Readers on

mendeley
9 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Family-Based Association Test Using Both Common and Rare Variants and Accounting for Directions of Effects for Sequencing Data
Published in
PLOS ONE, September 2014
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0107800
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Current family-based association tests for sequencing data were mainly developed for identifying rare variants associated with a complex disease. As the disease can be influenced by the joint effects of common and rare variants, common variants with modest effects may not be identified by the methods focusing on rare variants. Moreover, variants can have risk, neutral, or protective effects. Association tests that can effectively select groups of common and rare variants that are likely to be causal and consider the directions of effects have become important. We developed the Ordered Subset - Variable Threshold - Pedigree Disequilibrium Test (OVPDT), a combination of three algorithms, for association analysis in family sequencing data. The ordered subset algorithm is used to select a subset of common variants based on their relative risks, calculated using only parental mating types. The variable threshold algorithm is used to search for an optimal allele frequency threshold such that rare variants below the threshold are more likely to be causal. The PDT statistics from both rare and common variants selected by the two algorithms are combined as the OVPDT statistic. A permutation procedure is used in OVPDT to calculate the p-value. We used simulations to demonstrate that OVPDT has the correct type I error rates under different scenarios and compared the power of OVPDT with two other family-based association tests. The results suggested that OVPDT can have more power than the other tests if both common and rare variants have effects on the disease in a region.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 9 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 9 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 4 44%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 22%
Other 1 11%
Lecturer 1 11%
Student > Master 1 11%
Other 0 0%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 33%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 22%
Environmental Science 1 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 11%
Unknown 2 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 23 October 2014.
All research outputs
#23,298,365
of 34,362,729 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#143,470
of 224,527 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#185,339
of 294,753 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#3,402
of 5,463 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,362,729 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 224,527 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.2. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 294,753 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5,463 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.