One-stage design is better than two-stage design for genetic studies
Author Information
Author(s): Rori V Rohlfs, Chelsea Taylor, Lucia Mirea, Shelley B Bull, Mary Corey, Amy D Anderson
Primary Institution: University of Washington
Hypothesis
Is a one-stage design more powerful than a two-stage design for family-based genome-wide association studies?
Conclusion
One-stage methods are more powerful than two-stage methods in identifying genetic markers associated with traits.
Supporting Evidence
- The one-stage methods provided stronger evidence for association than the two-stage method.
- Discrepancies were observed between the evidence of association from different tests.
- The one-stage methods used more information, allowing for greater power.
Takeaway
This study shows that using one-step tests to find genetic markers is better than using two steps, making it easier to find important genes.
Methodology
The study compared one two-stage family-based approach to a single-stage method using simulated data sets and real SNP genotypes.
Limitations
The study was performed in the absence of population stratification, which may affect the results.
Participant Demographics
The study involved nuclear families with rheumatoid arthritis.
Statistical Information
P-Value
p<0.0024
Statistical Significance
p<0.05
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website