Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

False positive rates in a genomic screen for complex quantitative traits

W K Scott1, M C Speer, S M Leal

  • 1Section of Medical Genetics, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina 27710, USA.

Genetic Epidemiology
|January 1, 1997
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Test Performance and Potential Clinical Utility of the GenMark Dx ePlex Blood Culture Identification Gram-Negative Panel.

Microbiology spectrum·2023
Same author

Analytical performance and potential clinical utility of the GenMark Dx ePlex® blood culture identification gram-positive panel.

Diagnostic microbiology and infectious disease·2022
Same author

Exome Sequencing of Extended Families with Alzheimer's Disease Identifies Novel Genes Implicated in Cell Immunity and Neuronal Function.

Journal of Alzheimer's disease & Parkinsonism·2017
Same author

A homozygous missense mutation in SLC25A16 associated with autosomal recessive isolated fingernail dysplasia in a Pakistani family.

The British journal of dermatology·2017
Same author

Targeted sequencing of ABCA7 identifies splicing, stop-gain and intronic risk variants for Alzheimer disease.

Neuroscience letters·2017
Same author

GWAS analysis implicates NF-κB-mediated induction of inflammatory T cells in multiple sclerosis.

Genes and immunity·2016

Genomic screening identified many potential disease-associated genes, but distinguishing true positives from false positives proved challenging. Adjusting analysis methods like map density and significance levels impacted accuracy, highlighting limitations in current genomic analysis techniques.

Area of Science:

  • Genetics
  • Genomic Analysis
  • Statistical Genetics

Background:

  • Genomic screens are crucial for identifying genes linked to complex traits.
  • Distinguishing true associations from false positives is a significant challenge in genetic studies.
  • Previous methods may not reliably differentiate between true and false positive findings.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To evaluate false positive (FP) and true positive (TP) rates in genomic screening under varying conditions.
  • To assess the effectiveness of different analytical approaches in identifying genuine genetic associations.
  • To determine the reliability of multipoint analysis and independent replication for validating genetic findings.

Main Methods:

  • Conducted genomic screening for quantitative trait loci (QTL) in 239 nuclear pedigrees.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Compared FP and TP rates across three significance levels and two genetic map densities (2 cM and unspecified).
  • Utilized two-point and multipoint analyses, including follow-up of significant "plateaus" and replication in an independent dataset (replicate 80).

    • Main Results:

    • A 2 cM genetic map with alpha = 0.05 yielded the most FP but detected the most major genes.
    • Focusing on "plateaus" reduced FP but missed a significant gene (MG3 for Q3).
    • Multipoint analysis reduced candidate regions but had low TP rates; replication in replicate 80 showed inconsistent results, failing to validate Q3 genes and replicating FP regions.

    Conclusions:

    • Adjusting map density, plateau analysis, and significance levels can reduce FP but may also decrease detection of true positives (TP).
    • Multipoint analysis and replication in independent datasets may not be reliable for distinguishing TP from FP in this context.
    • Careful consideration of analytical methods is necessary to balance sensitivity and specificity in genomic association studies.