CiteULike is a free online bibliography manager. Register and you can start organising your references online.
Tags

Comprehensive literature review and statistical considerations for GWAS meta-analysis.

by: Ferdouse Begum, Debashis Ghosh, George C. Tseng, Eleanor Feingold
Nucleic acids research, Vol. 40, No. 9. (01 May 2012), pp. 3777-3784, doi:10.1093/nar/gkr1255  Key: citeulike:10222195

Formatted Citation


Show HTML

Likes (beta)

This copy of the article hasn't been liked by anyone yet.

View FullText article


Abstract

Over the last decade, genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have become the standard tool for gene discovery in human disease research. While debate continues about how to get the most out of these studies and on occasion about how much value these studies really provide, it is clear that many of the strongest results have come from large-scale mega-consortia and/or meta-analyses that combine data from up to dozens of studies and tens of thousands of subjects. While such analyses are becoming more and more common, statistical methods have lagged somewhat behind. There are good meta-analysis methods available, but even when they are carefully and optimally applied there remain some unresolved statistical issues. This article systematically reviews the GWAS meta-analysis literature, highlighting methodology and software options and reviewing methods that have been used in real studies. We illustrate differences among methods using a case study. We also discuss some of the unresolved issues and potential future directions.


guhjy's tags for this article

Citations (CiTO)

No CiTO relationships defined

X There are no reviews yet

X Find related articles from these CiteULike users

X Find related articles with these CiteULike tags

X Posting History


X Export records

Privacy Statement | Terms & Conditions
CiteULike organises scholarly (or academic) papers or literature and provides bibliographic (which means it makes bibliographies) for universities and higher education establishments. It helps undergraduates and postgraduates. People studying for PhDs or in postdoctoral (postdoc) positions. The service is similar in scope to EndNote or RefWorks or any other reference manager like BibTeX, but it is a social bookmarking service for scientists and humanities researchers.