These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

113 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10597486)

  • 1. Improving the power for disease locus detection in affected-sib-pair studies by using two-locus analysis and multiple regression methods.
    Cordell HJ; Jacobs KB; Wedig GC; Elston RC
    Genet Epidemiol; 1999; 17 Suppl 1():S521-6. PubMed ID: 10597486
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. An evaluation of affected-sib-pair methods and transmission/disequilibrium tests for detecting genes underlying a complex trait.
    Shugart YY; Wehman P; Collins A
    Genet Epidemiol; 1999; 17 Suppl 1():S727-30. PubMed ID: 10597521
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Strategies for detecting susceptibility genes in a complex disease.
    Babron MC; Barillot E; Margaritte-Jeannin P; Clerget-Darpoux F
    Genet Epidemiol; 1999; 17 Suppl 1():S479-83. PubMed ID: 10597479
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Departure from the triangle constraints in discordant sib pairs: a test for genetic heterogeneity.
    Quesneville H; Dizier MH; Clerget-Darpoux F
    Genet Epidemiol; 1999; 17 Suppl 1():S685-9. PubMed ID: 10597514
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Detecting gene-gene interactions using affected sib pair analysis with covariates.
    Holmans P
    Hum Hered; 2002; 53(2):92-102. PubMed ID: 12037408
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Association tests using unaffected-sibling versus pseudo-sibling controls.
    Siegmund KD; Gauderman WJ; Thomas DC
    Genet Epidemiol; 1999; 17 Suppl 1():S731-6. PubMed ID: 10597522
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. A comparison of some allele-sharing based linkage analysis methods for detecting complex trait loci.
    Liu Y; Mirea L; Pinnaduwage D; Fallah S; Tritchler D
    Genet Epidemiol; 1999; 17 Suppl 1():S639-42. PubMed ID: 10597506
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Power to detect linkage based on multiple sets of data in the presence of locus heterogeneity: comparative evaluation of model-based linkage methods for affected sib pair data.
    Vieland VJ; Wang K; Huang J
    Hum Hered; 2001; 51(4):199-208. PubMed ID: 11287741
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Power of concordant versus discordant sib pairs at different penetrance levels.
    Nicolaou M; Premkumar S; DeStefano AL; Farrer LA; Cupples LA
    Genet Epidemiol; 1999; 17 Suppl 1():S679-84. PubMed ID: 10597513
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. A joint test of linkage and gene x environment interaction, with affected sib pairs.
    Gauderman WJ; Morrison JL; Siegmund KD; Thomas DC
    Genet Epidemiol; 1999; 17 Suppl 1():S563-8. PubMed ID: 10597493
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Further evidence for the increased power of LOD scores compared with nonparametric methods.
    Durner M; Vieland VJ; Greenberg DA
    Am J Hum Genet; 1999 Jan; 64(1):281-9. PubMed ID: 9915967
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The score statistic of the LD-lod analysis: detecting linkage adaptive to linkage disequilibrium.
    Huang J; Jiang Y
    Hum Hered; 2001; 52(2):83-98. PubMed ID: 11474209
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The power of two-locus affected sib-pair linkage analysis to detect interacting disease loci.
    Hallgrímsdóttir IB; Speed TP
    Genet Epidemiol; 2008 Jan; 32(1):84-8. PubMed ID: 17654608
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Mapping genotype to phenotype for linkage analysis.
    Saccone NL; Downey TJ; Meyer DJ; Neuman RJ; Rice JP
    Genet Epidemiol; 1999; 17 Suppl 1():S703-8. PubMed ID: 10597517
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Regression models for allele sharing: analysis of accumulating data in affected sib pair studies.
    Bull SB; Greenwood CM; Mirea L; Morgan K
    Stat Med; 2002 Feb; 21(3):431-44. PubMed ID: 11813229
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Issues in genomic screening: critical values, sample sizes, and the ability to detect linkage.
    Rogus JJ; Cai T; Wei LJ
    Genet Epidemiol; 1999; 17 Suppl 1():S697-701. PubMed ID: 10597516
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. A generalized estimating equations approach to linkage analysis in sibships in relation to multiple markers and exposure factors.
    Thomas DC; Qian D; Gauderman WJ; Siegmund K; Morrison JL
    Genet Epidemiol; 1999; 17 Suppl 1():S737-42. PubMed ID: 10597523
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The effect of genotyping error in sib-pair genomewide linkage scans depends crucially upon the method of analysis.
    Walters K
    J Hum Genet; 2005; 50(7):329-337. PubMed ID: 16059746
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Affected-sib-pair interval mapping and exclusion for complex genetic traits: sampling considerations.
    Hauser ER; Boehnke M; Guo SW; Risch N
    Genet Epidemiol; 1996; 13(2):117-37. PubMed ID: 8722742
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Sib-pair linkage analyses of nuclear family data: quantitative versus dichotomous disease classification.
    Korczak JF; Goldstein AM
    Genet Epidemiol; 1997; 14(6):827-32. PubMed ID: 9433585
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.