ArticleGenetic epidemiology2009
A propensity score approach to correction for bias due to population stratification using genetic and non-genetic factors.
Article in Genetic epidemiology, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Methodological opportunities in genomic data analysis to advance health equity.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2025Review
- Estimating SNP heritability in presence of population substructure in biobank-scale datasets.Genetics · 2022Article
- A practical approach to adjusting for population stratification in genome-wide association studies: principal components and propensity scores (PCAPS).Statistical applications in genetics and molecular biology · 2018Article
- Single- and Bayesian Multi-Marker Genome-Wide Association for Haematological Parameters in Pigs.PloS one · 2016Article
- Discovery of candidate genes for muscle traits based on GWAS supported by eQTL-analysis.International journal of biological sciences · 2014Article
- Identifying Genetic Variants for Addiction via Propensity Score Adjusted Generalized Kendall's Tau.Journal of the American Statistical Association · 2014Article
- NCK2 is significantly associated with opiates addiction in African-origin men.TheScientificWorldJournal · 2013Article
- Analyzing genetic association studies with an extended propensity score approach.Statistical applications in genetics and molecular biology · 2012Article
- Propensity score analysis in the Genetic Analysis Workshop 17 simulated data set on independent individuals.BMC proceedings · 2011Article
- Article
- Correcting for Population Stratification in Genomewide Association Studies.Journal of the American Statistical Association · 2011Article
- Propensity score-based nonparametric test revealing genetic variants underlying bipolar disorder.Genetic epidemiology · 2011Article
- Accounting for population stratification in practice: a comparison of the main strategies dedicated to genome-wide association studies.PloS one · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Confounding due to population stratification (PS) arises when differences in both allele and disease frequencies exist in a population of mixed racial/ethnic subpopulations. Genomic control, structured association, principal components analysis (PCA), and multidimensional scaling (MDS) approaches have been proposed to address this bias using genetic markers. However, confounding due to PS can also be due to non-genetic factors. Propensity scores are widely used to address confounding in observational studies but have not been adapted to deal with PS in genetic association studies. We propose a genomic propensity score (GPS) approach to correct for bias due to PS that considers both genetic and non-genetic factors. We compare the GPS method with PCA and MDS using simulation studies. Our results show that GPS can adequately adjust and consistently correct for bias due to PS. Under no/mild, moderate, and severe PS, GPS yielded estimated with bias close to 0 (mean=-0.0044, standard error=0.0087). Under moderate or severe PS, the GPS method consistently outperforms the PCA method in terms of bias, coverage probability (CP), and type I error. Under moderate PS, the GPS method consistently outperforms the MDS method in terms of CP. PCA maintains relatively high power compared to both MDS and GPS methods under the simulated situations. GPS and MDS are comparable in terms of statistical properties such as bias, type I error, and power. The GPS method provides a novel and robust tool for obtaining less-biased estimates of genetic associations that can consider both genetic and non-genetic factors.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.