MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2084636123 · doi:10.1186/1471-2156-6-s1-s52

On normality, ethnicity, and missing values in quantitative trait locus mapping

2005· article· en· W2084636123 on OpenAlexaff
Aurélie Labbe, Hanna Wormald

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Genetics · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic Associations and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNormalityPedigree chartImputation (statistics)CovariateTraitQuantitative trait locusMissing dataLinkage (software)StatisticsLocus (genetics)Ethnic groupMicrosatelliteEconometricsGeneticsMathematicsBiologyComputer scienceAllele

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: This paper deals with the detection of significant linkage for quantitative traits using a variance components approach. Microsatellite markers were obtained for the Genetic Analysis Workshop 14 Collaborative Study on the Genetics of Alcoholism data. Ethnic heterogeneity, highly skewed quantitative measures, and a high rate of missing values are all present in this dataset and well known to impact upon linkage analysis. This makes it a good candidate for investigation. RESULTS: As expected, we observed a number of changes in LOD scores, especially for chromosomes 1, 7, and 18, along with the three factors studied. A dramatic example of such changes can be found in chromosome 7. Highly significant linkage to one of the quantitative traits became insignificant when a proper normalizing transformation of the trait was used and when analysis was carried out on an ethnically homogeneous subset of the original pedigrees. CONCLUSION: In agreement with existing literature, transforming a trait to ensure normality using a Box-Cox transformation is highly recommended in order to avoid false-positive linkages. Furthermore, pedigrees should be sorted by ethnic groups and analyses should be carried out separately. Finally, one should be aware that the inclusion of covariates with a high rate of missing values reduces considerably the number of subjects included in the model. In such a case, the loss in power may be large. Imputation methods are then recommended.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.163
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.441
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.163
Threshold uncertainty score0.864

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1630.441
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.012
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.052
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.275 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC GeneticsSame topicGenetic Associations and EpidemiologyFrench-language works237,207