首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Nucleic Acids Research >Comprehensive literature review and statistical considerations for GWAS meta-analysis
【2h】

Comprehensive literature review and statistical considerations for GWAS meta-analysis

机译:GWAS荟萃分析的综合文献综述和统计考虑

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

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.
机译:在过去的十年中,全基因组关联研究(GWAS)已成为人类疾病研究中发现基因的标准工具。尽管关于如何充分利用这些研究的争论仍在继续,有时关于这些研究真正提供多少价值的争论仍在继续,但很明显,许多最强的结果来自大规模的大型财团和/或荟萃分析,结合多达数十项研究和数万个学科的数据。尽管这种分析越来越普遍,但统计方法却有些落后。有很好的荟萃分析方法,但是即使仔细地和最佳地应用它们,仍然存在一些未解决的统计问题。本文系统地回顾了GWAS荟萃分析文献,重点介绍了在实际研究中使用的方法和软件选项以及回顾方法。我们使用案例研究说明了方法之间的差异。我们还将讨论一些未解决的问题和潜在的未来方向。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号