↓ Skip to main content

Using eQTL weights to improve power for genome-wide association studies: a genetic study of childhood asthma

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Genetics, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
62 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
88 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Using eQTL weights to improve power for genome-wide association studies: a genetic study of childhood asthma
Published in
Frontiers in Genetics, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fgene.2013.00103
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lin Li, Michael Kabesch, Emmanuelle Bouzigon, Florence Demenais, Martin Farrall, Miriam F. Moffatt, Xihong Lin, Liming Liang

Abstract

Increasing evidence suggests that single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) associated with complex traits are more likely to be expression quantitative trait loci (eQTLs). Incorporating eQTL information hence has potential to increase power of genome-wide association studies (GWAS). In this paper, we propose using eQTL weights as prior information in SNP based association tests to improve test power while maintaining control of the family-wise error rate (FWER) or the false discovery rate (FDR). We apply the proposed methods to the analysis of a GWAS for childhood asthma consisting of 1296 unrelated individuals with German ancestry. The results confirm that eQTLs are enriched for previously reported asthma SNPs. We also find that some SNPs are insignificant using procedures without eQTL weighting, but become significant using eQTL-weighted Bonferroni or Benjamini-Hochberg procedures, while controlling the same FWER or FDR level. Some of these SNPs have been reported by independent studies in recent literature. The results suggest that the eQTL-weighted procedures provide a promising approach for improving power of GWAS. We also report the results of our methods applied to the large-scale European GABRIEL consortium data.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 88 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 5%
Germany 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
Unknown 82 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 23 26%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 22%
Professor > Associate Professor 10 11%
Student > Master 7 8%
Student > Bachelor 6 7%
Other 13 15%
Unknown 10 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 44 50%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 11%
Computer Science 6 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 6%
Mathematics 4 5%
Other 6 7%
Unknown 13 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 June 2013.
All research outputs
#15,222,208
of 22,711,645 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Genetics
#5,313
of 11,756 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#180,871
of 280,736 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Genetics
#200
of 319 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,711,645 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,756 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 280,736 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 319 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.