↓ Skip to main content

Gene-based multiple regression association testing for combined examination of common and low frequency variants in quantitative trait analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Genetics, January 2013
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
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
13 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.
Title
Gene-based multiple regression association testing for combined examination of common and low frequency variants in quantitative trait analysis
Published in
Frontiers in Genetics, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fgene.2013.00233
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yun Joo Yoo, Lei Sun, Shelley B. Bull

Abstract

Multi-marker methods for genetic association analysis can be performed for common and low frequency SNPs to improve power. Regression models are an intuitive way to formulate multi-marker tests. In previous studies we evaluated regression-based multi-marker tests for common SNPs, and through identification of bins consisting of correlated SNPs, developed a multi-bin linear combination (MLC) test that is a compromise between a 1 df linear combination test and a multi-df global test. Bins of SNPs in high linkage disequilibrium (LD) are identified, and a linear combination of individual SNP statistics is constructed within each bin. Then association with the phenotype is represented by an overall statistic with df as many or few as the number of bins. In this report we evaluate multi-marker tests for SNPs that occur at low frequencies. There are many linear and quadratic multi-marker tests that are suitable for common or low frequency variant analysis. We compared the performance of the MLC tests with various linear and quadratic statistics in joint or marginal regressions. For these comparisons, we performed a simulation study of genotypes and quantitative traits for 85 genes with many low frequency SNPs based on HapMap Phase III. We compared the tests using (1) set of all SNPs in a gene, (2) set of common SNPs in a gene (MAF ≥ 5%), (3) set of low frequency SNPs (1% ≤ MAF < 5%). For different trait models based on low frequency causal SNPs, we found that combined analysis using all SNPs including common and low frequency SNPs is a good and robust choice whereas using common SNPs alone or low frequency SNP alone can lose power. MLC tests performed well in combined analysis except where two low frequency causal SNPs with opposing effects are positively correlated. Overall, across different sets of analysis, the joint regression Wald test showed consistently good performance whereas other statistics including the ones based on marginal regression had lower power for some situations.

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 readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 8%
Denmark 1 8%
Italy 1 8%
Unknown 10 77%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 38%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 23%
Student > Master 2 15%
Student > Bachelor 1 8%
Professor 1 8%
Other 1 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 46%
Mathematics 2 15%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 15%
Computer Science 2 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 8%
Other 0 0%
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 20 November 2013.
All research outputs
#13,901,154
of 22,729,647 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Genetics
#3,502
of 11,757 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#164,428
of 280,769 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Genetics
#147
of 319 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,729,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,757 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 280,769 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 319 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 50% of its contemporaries.