ArticleGenomics & informatics2022
Beta-Meta: a meta-analysis application considering heterogeneity among genome-wide association studies.
Article in Genomics & informatics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Many packages for a meta-analysis of genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have beendeveloped to discover genetic variants. Although variations across studies must be considered, there are not many currently-accessible packages that estimate between-study heterogeneity. Thus, we propose a python based application called Beta-Meta which can easilyprocess a meta-analysis by automatically selecting between a fixed effects and a randomeffects model based on heterogeneity. Beta-Meta implements flexible input data manipulation to allow multiple meta-analyses of different genotype-phenotype associations in asingle process. It provides a step-by-step meta-analysis of GWAS for each association inthe following order: heterogeneity test, two different calculations of an effect size and ap-value based on heterogeneity, and the Benjamini-Hochberg p-value adjustment. Thesemethods enable users to validate the results of individual studies with greater statisticalpower and better estimation precision. We elaborate on these and illustrate them with examples from several studies of infertility-related disorders.
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.