Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24791902›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of human genetics2014

Variant association tools for quality control and analysis of large-scale sequence and genotyping array data.

Gao T Wang, Bo Peng, Suzanne M Leal

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of human genetics, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 53 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
53citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

53 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Gao T WangCenter for Statistical Genetics, Department of Molecular and Human Genetics, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX 77030, USA.
Bo PengDepartment of Bioinformatics and Computational Biology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA.
Suzanne M LealCenter for Statistical Genetics, Department of Molecular and Human Genetics, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX 77030, USA. Electronic address: sleal@bcm.edu.

Funding

Tumor Evolution and Metastasis ProgramP30CA016672 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI DIANE BODURKA · 1985 to 2026
$290.8M
UW Center for Mendelian GenomicsU54HG006493 · NHGRI · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI BAMSHAD, MICHAEL JOSEPH, NICKERSON, DEBORAH A · 2012 to 2015
$20.0M
UW Center for Mendelian GenomicsUM1HG006493 · NHGRI · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI BAMSHAD, MICHAEL JOSEPH, LEAL, SUZANNE M · 2016 to 2020
$15.3M
Northwest Genomics CenterUC2HL102926 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI GREEN, PHILIP P, NICKERSON, DEBORAH A · 2010 to 2010
$14.0M
Minority Health-GRID Network: A Genomics Resource for Health Disparity ResearchRC4MD005964 · NIMHD · MOREHOUSE SCHOOL OF MEDICINE · PI DAVIS, ROBERT LOWELL, NICKERSON, DEBORAH A · 2010 to 2010
$13.3M
Northwest Genomics CenterRC2HL102926 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI GREEN, PHILIP P, NICKERSON, DEBORAH A · 2009 to 2009
$11.0M
Statistical Methods for Population Genomics and "Next-gen" Sequencing DataR01HG005859 · NHGRI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI SCHEET, PAUL A · 2011 to 2015
$1.9M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA016672NHGRI NIH HHS 1R01HG005859NHGRI NIH HHS HG006493NHGRI NIH HHS R01 HG005859NHGRI NIH HHS U54 HG006493NHGRI NIH HHS UM1 HG006493NHLBI NIH HHS HL102926NHLBI NIH HHS RC2 HL102926NHLBI NIH HHS UC2 HL102926NIMHD NIH HHS MD005964NIMHD NIH HHS RC4 MD005964
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Currently there is great interest in detecting associations between complex traits and rare variants. In this report, we describe Variant Association Tools (VAT) and the VAT pipeline, which implements best practices for rare-variant association studies. Highlights of VAT include variant-site and call-level quality control (QC), summary statistics, phenotype- and genotype-based sample selection, variant annotation, selection of variants for association analysis, and a collection of rare-variant association methods for analyzing qualitative and quantitative traits. The association testing framework for VAT is regression based, which readily allows for flexible construction of association models with multiple covariates and weighting themes based on allele frequencies or predicted functionality. Additionally, pathway analyses, conditional analyses, and analyses of gene-gene and gene-environment interactions can be performed. VAT is capable of rapidly scanning through data by using multi-process computation, adaptive permutation, and simultaneously conducting association analysis via multiple methods. Results are available in text or graphic file formats and additionally can be output to relational databases for further annotation and filtering. An interface to R language also facilitates user implementation of novel association methods. The VAT's data QC and association-analysis pipeline can be applied to sequence, imputed, and genotyping array, e.g., "exome chip," data, providing a reliable and reproducible computational environment in which to analyze small- to large-scale studies with data from the latest genotyping and sequencing technologies. Application of the VAT pipeline is demonstrated through analysis of data from the 1000 Genomes project.

Indexed as

Quality ControlSoftwareGenetic Association StudiesGenetic VariationGenotyping TechniquesHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHumansMultifactorial Inheritance

Identifiers

PMID24791902
PMCPMC4067555

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.