Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://olympias.lib.uoi.gr/jspui/handle/123456789/16162Full metadata record
| DC Field | Value | Language |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.author | Evangelou, E. | en |
| dc.contributor.author | Trikalinos, T. A. | en |
| dc.contributor.author | Salanti, G. | en |
| dc.contributor.author | Ioannidis, J. P. A. | en |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2015-11-24T18:28:36Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2015-11-24T18:28:36Z | - |
| dc.identifier.issn | 1553-7390 | - |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://olympias.lib.uoi.gr/jspui/handle/123456789/16162 | - |
| dc.rights | Default Licence | - |
| dc.subject | deficit hyperactivity disorder | en |
| dc.subject | dopamine-beta-hydroxylase | en |
| dc.subject | human genome epidemiology | en |
| dc.subject | population stratification | en |
| dc.subject | transmission/disequilibrium test | en |
| dc.subject | allelic association | en |
| dc.subject | publication bias | en |
| dc.subject | metaanalysis | en |
| dc.subject | disease | en |
| dc.subject | admixture | en |
| dc.title | Family-based versus unrelated case-control designs for genetic associations | en |
| heal.type | journalArticle | - |
| heal.type.en | Journal article | en |
| heal.type.el | Άρθρο Περιοδικού | el |
| heal.identifier.primary | DOI 10.1371/journal.pgen.0020123 | - |
| heal.identifier.secondary | <Go to ISI>://000240006900004 | - |
| heal.identifier.secondary | http://www.plosgenetics.org/article/fetchObjectAttachment.action?uri=info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pgen.0020123&representation=PDF | - |
| heal.language | en | - |
| heal.access | campus | - |
| heal.recordProvider | Πανεπιστήμιο Ιωαννίνων. Σχολή Επιστημών και Τεχνολογιών. Τμήμα Βιολογικών Εφαρμογών και Τεχνολογιών | el |
| heal.publicationDate | 2006 | - |
| heal.abstract | The most simple and commonly used approach for genetic associations is the case-control study design of unrelated people. This design is susceptible to population stratification. This problem is obviated in family-based studies, but it is usually difficult to accumulate large enough samples of well-characterized families. We addressed empirically whether the two designs give similar estimates of association in 93 investigations where both unrelated case-control and family-based designs had been employed. Estimated odds ratios differed beyond chance between the two designs in only four instances (4%). The summary relative odds ratio (ROR) (the ratio of odds ratios obtained from unrelated case-control and family-based studies) was close to unity (0.96 [95% confidence interval, 0.91-1.01]). There was no heterogeneity in the ROR across studies (amount of heterogeneity beyond chance I(2) = 0%). Differences on whether results were nominally statistically significant (p < 0.05) or not with the two designs were common (opposite classification rates 14% and 17%); this reflected largely differences in power. Conclusions were largely similar in diverse subgroup analyses. Unrelated case-control and family-based designs give overall similar estimates of association. We cannot rule out rare large biases or common small biases. | en |
| heal.journalName | PLoS Genet | en |
| heal.journalType | peer reviewed | - |
| heal.fullTextAvailability | TRUE | - |
| Appears in Collections: | Άρθρα σε επιστημονικά περιοδικά ( Ανοικτά) | |
Files in This Item:
| File | Description | Size | Format | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Evangelou-2006-Family-based versus.pdf | 225.24 kB | Adobe PDF | View/Open |
This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License
