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 *

123 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11119296)

  • 1. Likelihood-ratio affected sib-pair tests applied to multiply affected sibships: issues of power and type I error rate.
    Holmans P
    Genet Epidemiol; 2001 Jan; 20(1):44-56. PubMed ID: 11119296
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Robustness and power of the maximum-likelihood-binomial and maximum-likelihood-score methods, in multipoint linkage analysis of affected-sibship data.
    Abel L; Müller-Myhsok B
    Am J Hum Genet; 1998 Aug; 63(2):638-47. PubMed ID: 9683590
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Comparison of four sib-pair linkage methods for analyzing sibships with more than two affecteds: interest of the binomial maximum likelihood approach.
    Abel L; Alcais A; Mallet A
    Genet Epidemiol; 1998; 15(4):371-90. PubMed ID: 9671987
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Optimal weighting scheme for affected sib-pair analysis of sibship data.
    Sham PC; Zhao JH; Curtis D
    Ann Hum Genet; 1997 Jan; 61(Pt 1):61-9. PubMed ID: 9066928
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Sibship T2 association tests of complex diseases for tightly linked markers.
    Fan R; Knapp M
    Hum Genomics; 2005 Jun; 2(2):90-112. PubMed ID: 16004725
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. An improvement on the maximum likelihood reconstruction of pedigrees from marker data.
    Wang J
    Heredity (Edinb); 2013 Aug; 111(2):165-74. PubMed ID: 23612692
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Design considerations in a sib-pair study of linkage for susceptibility loci in cancer.
    Kerber RA; Amos CI; Yeap BY; Finkelstein DM; Thomas DC
    BMC Med Genet; 2008 Jul; 9():64. PubMed ID: 18616822
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. A discordant-sibship test for disequilibrium and linkage: no need for parental data.
    Horvath S; Laird NM
    Am J Hum Genet; 1998 Dec; 63(6):1886-97. PubMed ID: 9837840
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Correcting for ascertainment bias of relative-risk estimates obtained using affected-sib-pair linkage data.
    Cordell HJ; Olson JM
    Genet Epidemiol; 2000 Apr; 18(4):307-21. PubMed ID: 10797591
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Efficiency of typing unaffected relatives in an affected-sib-pair linkage study with single-locus and multiple tightly linked markers.
    Holmans P; Clayton D
    Am J Hum Genet; 1995 Nov; 57(5):1221-32. PubMed ID: 7485174
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Adding further power to the Haseman and Elston method for detecting linkage in larger sibships: weighting sums and differences.
    Shete S; Jacobs KB; Elston RC
    Hum Hered; 2003; 55(2-3):79-85. PubMed ID: 12931046
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Haseman and Elston revisited.
    Elston RC; Buxbaum S; Jacobs KB; Olson JM
    Genet Epidemiol; 2000 Jul; 19(1):1-17. PubMed ID: 10861893
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Linkage analysis of quantitative trait loci: sib pairs or sibships?
    Alcaïs A; Abel L
    Hum Hered; 2000; 50(4):251-6. PubMed ID: 10782019
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Comparison of nonparametric statistics for detection of linkage in nuclear families: single-marker evaluation.
    Davis S; Weeks DE
    Am J Hum Genet; 1997 Dec; 61(6):1431-44. PubMed ID: 9399893
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Accurate inference of relationships in sib-pair linkage studies.
    Boehnke M; Cox NJ
    Am J Hum Genet; 1997 Aug; 61(2):423-9. PubMed ID: 9311748
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. HLA sharing in multiplex sibships.
    Suarez BK; Crouse J; Van Eerdewegh P
    Ann Hum Genet; 1983 May; 47(2):153-9. PubMed ID: 6881912
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Incorporation of covariates in multipoint model-free linkage analysis of binary traits: how important are unaffecteds?
    Alcaïs A; Abel L
    Eur J Hum Genet; 2001 Aug; 9(8):613-20. PubMed ID: 11528507
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The triangle test statistic (TTS): a test of genetic homogeneity using departure from the triangle constraints in IBD distribution among affected sib-pairs.
    Dizier MH; Quesneville H; Prum B; Selinger-Leneman H; Clerget-Darpoux F
    Ann Hum Genet; 2000 Sep; 64(Pt 5):433-42. PubMed ID: 11281281
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. A survey of affected-sibship statistics for nonparametric linkage analysis.
    Sengul H; Weeks DE; Feingold E
    Am J Hum Genet; 2001 Jul; 69(1):179-90. PubMed ID: 11404816
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Multilocus linkage tests based on affected relative pairs.
    Cordell HJ; Wedig GC; Jacobs KB; Elston RC
    Am J Hum Genet; 2000 Apr; 66(4):1273-86. PubMed ID: 10729111
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.