↓ Skip to main content

Identifying pleiotropic genes in genome-wide association studies from related subjects using the linear mixed model and Fisher combination function

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Bioinformatics, August 2017
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
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
14 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
Identifying pleiotropic genes in genome-wide association studies from related subjects using the linear mixed model and Fisher combination function
Published in
BMC Bioinformatics, August 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12859-017-1791-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

James J. Yang, L Keoki Williams, Anne Buu

Abstract

A multivariate genome-wide association test is proposed for analyzing data on multivariate quantitative phenotypes collected from related subjects. The proposed method is a two-step approach. The first step models the association between the genotype and marginal phenotype using a linear mixed model. The second step uses the correlation between residuals of the linear mixed model to estimate the null distribution of the Fisher combination test statistic. The simulation results show that the proposed method controls the type I error rate and is more powerful than the marginal tests across different population structures (admixed or non-admixed) and relatedness (related or independent). The statistical analysis on the database of the Study of Addiction: Genetics and Environment (SAGE) demonstrates that applying the multivariate association test may facilitate identification of the pleiotropic genes contributing to the risk for alcohol dependence commonly expressed by four correlated phenotypes. This study proposes a multivariate method for identifying pleiotropic genes while adjusting for cryptic relatedness and population structure between subjects. The two-step approach is not only powerful but also computationally efficient even when the number of subjects and the number of phenotypes are both very large.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 14 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 29%
Researcher 3 21%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 21%
Lecturer 1 7%
Student > Master 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Unknown 1 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 43%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 7%
Engineering 1 7%
Unknown 2 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 25 August 2017.
All research outputs
#13,509,461
of 23,306,612 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#4,092
of 7,380 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#156,355
of 317,985 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#53
of 100 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,306,612 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,380 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 317,985 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 100 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.