Literature DB >> 3189333

Correcting for single ascertainment by truncation for a quantitative trait.

M R Young1, M Boehnke, P P Moll.   

Abstract

Two methods for correcting for single ascertainment by truncation are compared. These methods are (1) conditioning on the phenotype of the proband and (2) conditioning on the event that the proband phenotype is greater than a threshold. The use of a constraint on model parameters is considered. The lack of robustness of this method to misspecifiction of the constraint has been demonstrated by Rao et al. It is noted that the constraint on model parameters used by Rao et al. is equivalent to an encoding of knowledge derived from a random sample, and an alternative representation of this information that has superior robustness properties is proposed.

Mesh:

Year:  1988        PMID: 3189333      PMCID: PMC1715533     

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


  14 in total

1.  The effect of proband designation on segregation analysis.

Authors:  D A Greenberg
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  1986-09       Impact factor: 11.025

2.  Robust inference for variance components models in families ascertained through probands: II. Analysis of spirometric measures.

Authors:  T H Beaty; K Y Liang; S Seerey; B H Cohen
Journal:  Genet Epidemiol       Date:  1987       Impact factor: 2.135

3.  Nonrandom sampling in human genetics: skewness and kurtosis.

Authors:  R Chakraborty; C L Hanis
Journal:  Genet Epidemiol       Date:  1987       Impact factor: 2.135

4.  Ascertainment in the sequential sampling of pedigrees.

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

5.  Ascertainment and goodness of fit of variance component models for pedigree data.

Authors:  M Boehnke; K Lange
Journal:  Prog Clin Biol Res       Date:  1984

6.  Detection of genetic heterogeneity among pedigrees through complex segregation analysis: an application to hypercholesterolemia.

Authors:  P P Moll; T D Berry; W H Weidman; R Ellefson; H Gordon; B A Kottke
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  1984-01       Impact factor: 11.025

7.  Nonrandom sampling in human genetics: familial correlations.

Authors:  C L Hanis; R Chakraborty
Journal:  IMA J Math Appl Med Biol       Date:  1984

8.  Extensions to multivariate normal models for pedigree analysis.

Authors:  J L Hopper; J D Mathews
Journal:  Ann Hum Genet       Date:  1982-10       Impact factor: 1.670

9.  The Muscatine Cholesterol Family Study: familial aggregation of blood lipids and relationship of lipid levels to age, sex and hormone use.

Authors:  K D Bucher; H G Schrott; W R Clarke; R M Lauer
Journal:  J Chronic Dis       Date:  1982

10.  Schizophrenia: the systematic construction of genetic models.

Authors:  J Stewart
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  1980-01       Impact factor: 11.025

View more
  4 in total

1.  Recessive inheritance of obesity in familial non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus, and lack of linkage to nine candidate genes.

Authors:  S J Hasstedt; M Hoffman; M F Leppert; S C Elbein
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  1997-09       Impact factor: 11.025

2.  The genetic and environmental sources of body mass index variability: the Muscatine Ponderosity Family Study.

Authors:  P P Moll; T L Burns; R M Lauer
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  1991-12       Impact factor: 11.025

3.  Sample-size guidelines for linkage analysis of a dominant locus for a quantitative trait by the method of lod scores.

Authors:  M Boehnke
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  1990-08       Impact factor: 11.025

4.  Identifying pedigrees segregating at a major locus for a quantitative trait: an efficient strategy for linkage analysis.

Authors:  M Boehnke; P P Moll
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  1989-02       Impact factor: 11.025

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.