↓ Skip to main content

Integrative analysis of functional genomic annotations and sequencing data to identify rare causal variants via hierarchical modeling

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Genetics, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
13 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
Integrative analysis of functional genomic annotations and sequencing data to identify rare causal variants via hierarchical modeling
Published in
Frontiers in Genetics, May 2015
DOI 10.3389/fgene.2015.00176
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marinela Capanu, Iuliana Ionita-Laza

Abstract

Identifying the small number of rare causal variants contributing to disease has been a major focus of investigation in recent years, but represents a formidable statistical challenge due to the rare frequencies with which these variants are observed. In this commentary we draw attention to a formal statistical framework, namely hierarchical modeling, to combine functional genomic annotations with sequencing data with the objective of enhancing our ability to identify rare causal variants. Using simulations we show that in all configurations studied, the hierarchical modeling approach has superior discriminatory ability compared to a recently proposed aggregate measure of deleteriousness, the Combined Annotation-Dependent Depletion (CADD) score, supporting our premise that aggregate functional genomic measures can more accurately identify causal variants when used in conjunction with sequencing data through a hierarchical modeling approach.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 13 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 3 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 23%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 15%
Student > Master 2 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 8%
Other 1 8%
Unknown 1 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 31%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 23%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 23%
Chemistry 1 8%
Unknown 2 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 12 May 2015.
All research outputs
#18,409,030
of 22,803,211 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Genetics
#7,034
of 11,762 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#192,465
of 264,541 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Genetics
#100
of 110 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,803,211 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,762 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 264,541 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 110 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.