Impact of measurement error on testing genetic association with quantitative traits
PLoS ONE, ISSN: 1932-6203, Vol: 9, Issue: 1, Page: e87044
2014
- 13Citations
- 47Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations13
- Citation Indexes13
- 13
- CrossRef5
- Captures47
- Readers47
- 47
Article Description
Measurement error of a phenotypic trait reduces the power to detect genetic associations. We examined the impact of sample size, allele frequency and effect size in presence of measurement error for quantitative traits. The statistical power to detect genetic association with phenotype mean and variability was investigated analytically. The non-centrality parameter for a non-central F distribution was derived and verified using computer simulations. We obtained equivalent formulas for the cost of phenotype measurement error. Effects of differences in measurements were examined in a genome-wide association study (GWAS) of two grading scales for cataract and a replication study of genetic variants influencing blood pressure. The mean absolute difference between the analytic power and simulation power for comparison of phenotypic means and variances was less than 0.005, and the absolute difference did not exceed 0.02. To maintain the same power, a one standard deviation (SD) in measurement error of a standard normal distributed trait required a one-fold increase in sample size for comparison of means, and a three-fold increase in sample size for comparison of variances. GWAS results revealed almost no overlap in the significant SNPs (p<10) for the two cataract grading scales while replication results in genetic variants of blood pressure displayed no significant differences between averaged blood pressure measurements and single blood pressure measurements. We have developed a framework for researchers to quantify power in the presence of measurement error, which will be applicable to studies of phenotypes in which the measurement is highly variable.
Bibliographic Details
10.1371/journal.pone.0087044; 10.1371/journal.pone.0087044.t003; 10.1371/journal.pone.0087044.t002; 10.1371/journal.pone.0087044.g003; 10.1371/journal.pone.0087044.g002; 10.1371/journal.pone.0087044.t004; 10.1371/journal.pone.0087044.t001; 10.1371/journal.pone.0087044.g001; 10.1371/journal.pone.0087044.g004
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84899861420&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0087044; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24475218; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0087044.t003; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0087044.t003; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0087044.t002; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0087044.t002; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0087044.g003; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0087044.g003; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0087044.g002; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0087044.g002; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0087044.t004; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0087044.t004; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0087044; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0087044.t001; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0087044.t001; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0087044.g001; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0087044.g001; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0087044.g004; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0087044.g004; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0087044.t002; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0087044.t002; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0087044; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0087044; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0087044.t001; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0087044.t001; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0087044.g004; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0087044.g004; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0087044.t003; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0087044.t003; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0087044.g001; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0087044.g001; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0087044.t004; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0087044.t004; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0087044.g002; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0087044.g002; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0087044.g003; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0087044.g003; http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0087044.t001; http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0087044.g003; http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0087044.t004; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0087044&type=printable; http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0087044.t002; http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0087044.g002; http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0087044.g004; http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0087044.t003; http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0087044; http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0087044.g001; http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0087044; http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0087044; http://www.plosone.org/article/metrics/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0087044; http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0087044&type=printable
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know