Literature DB >> 11880949

Ascertainment-adjusted parameter estimates revisited.

Michael P Epstein1, Xihong Lin, Michael Boehnke.   

Abstract

Ascertainment-adjusted parameter estimates from a genetic analysis are typically assumed to reflect the parameter values in the original population from which the ascertained data were collected. Burton et al. (2000) recently showed that, given unmodeled parameter heterogeneity, the standard ascertainment adjustment leads to biased parameter estimates of the population-based values. This finding has important implications in complex genetic studies, because of the potential existence of unmodeled genetic parameter heterogeneity. The authors further stated the important point that, given unmodeled heterogeneity, the ascertainment-adjusted parameter estimates reflect the true parameter values in the ascertained subpopulation. They illustrated these statements with two examples. By revisiting these examples, we demonstrate that if the ascertainment scheme and the nature of the data can be correctly modeled, then an ascertainment-adjusted analysis returns population-based parameter estimates. We further demonstrate that if the ascertainment scheme and data cannot be modeled properly, then the resulting ascertainment-adjusted analysis produces parameter estimates that generally do not reflect the true values in either the original population or the ascertained subpopulation.

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11880949      PMCID: PMC379117          DOI: 10.1086/339517

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Hum Genet        ISSN: 0002-9297            Impact factor:   11.025


  11 in total

1.  Ascertainment bias in the estimation of sibling genetic risk parameters.

Authors:  J M Olson; H J Cordell
Journal:  Genet Epidemiol       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 2.135

2.  Inference of population structure using multilocus genotype data.

Authors:  J K Pritchard; M Stephens; P Donnelly
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 4.562

3.  Ascertainment adjustment: where does it take us?

Authors:  P R Burton; L J Palmer; K Jacobs; K J Keen; J M Olson; R C Elston
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2000-11-14       Impact factor: 11.025

4.  Ascertainment issues in variance components models.

Authors:  M de Andrade; C I Amos
Journal:  Genet Epidemiol       Date:  2000-12       Impact factor: 2.135

5.  Genetic tests under incomplete ascertainment.

Authors:  N E MORTON
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  1959-03       Impact factor: 11.025

6.  A resolution of the ascertainment sampling problem. I. Theory.

Authors:  W J Ewens; N C Shute
Journal:  Theor Popul Biol       Date:  1986-12       Impact factor: 1.570

7.  Sampling considerations in the gathering and analysis of pedigree data.

Authors:  R C Elston; E Sobel
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  1979-01       Impact factor: 11.025

8.  Ascertainment in the sequential sampling of pedigrees.

Authors:  C Cannings; E A Thompson
Journal:  Clin Genet       Date:  1977-10       Impact factor: 4.438

9.  A simple method of estimating the segregation ratio under complete ascertainment.

Authors:  C C Li; N Mantel
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  1968-01       Impact factor: 11.025

10.  Inherent intractability of the ascertainment problem for pedigree data: a general likelihood framework.

Authors:  V J Vieland; S E Hodge
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  1995-01       Impact factor: 11.025

View more
  14 in total

1.  Response to Epstein et al.

Authors:  Paul R Burton; Lyle J Palmer; Kevin J Keen; Jane M Olson; Robert C Elston
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 11.025

2.  Ascertainment-adjusted maximum likelihood estimation for the additive genetic gamma frailty model.

Authors:  Wanlong Sun; Hongzhe Li
Journal:  Lifetime Data Anal       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 1.588

3.  Efficient study designs for test of genetic association using sibship data and unrelated cases and controls.

Authors:  Mingyao Li; Michael Boehnke; Gonçalo R Abecasis
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2006-03-20       Impact factor: 11.025

4.  Ascertainment adjustment in genetic studies of ordinal traits.

Authors:  Rui Feng; Heping Zhang
Journal:  Hum Genet       Date:  2006-03-10       Impact factor: 4.132

5.  A unified framework for detecting rare variant quantitative trait associations in pedigree and unrelated individuals via sequence data.

Authors:  Dajiang J Liu; Suzanne M Leal
Journal:  Hum Hered       Date:  2012-04-28       Impact factor: 0.444

6.  Population-Calibrated Gene Characterization: Estimating Age at Onset Distributions Associated With Cancer Genes.

Authors:  Edwin S Iversen; Sining Chen
Journal:  J Am Stat Assoc       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 5.033

7.  Multiple genetic variant association testing by collapsing and kernel methods with pedigree or population structured data.

Authors:  Daniel J Schaid; Shannon K McDonnell; Jason P Sinnwell; Stephen N Thibodeau
Journal:  Genet Epidemiol       Date:  2013-05-05       Impact factor: 2.135

8.  Familial recurrence risk with varying amount of family history.

Authors:  Daniel J Schaid; Shannon K McDonnell; Stephen N Thibodeau
Journal:  Genet Epidemiol       Date:  2019-02-11       Impact factor: 2.135

9.  A Variance-Component Framework for Pedigree Analysis of Continuous and Categorical Outcomes.

Authors:  Michael P Epstein; Jessica E Hunter; Emily G Allen; Stephanie L Sherman; Xihong Lin; Michael Boehnke
Journal:  Stat Biosci       Date:  2009-11

10.  A Frailty-Model-Based Method for Estimating Age-Dependent Penetrance from Family Data.

Authors:  Yun-Hee Choi
Journal:  J Biom Biostat       Date:  2012-02-15
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.