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.
132 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 14655099)
1. Affected-sib-pair data can be used to distinguish two-locus heterogeneity from two-locus epistasis. Cordell HJ Am J Hum Genet; 2003 Dec; 73(6):1468-71; author reply 1471-3. PubMed ID: 14655099 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Reports of the death of the epistasis model are greatly exaggerated. Farrall M Am J Hum Genet; 2003 Dec; 73(6):1467-8; author reply 1471-3. PubMed ID: 14655098 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Two-locus heterogeneity cannot be distinguished from two-locus epistasis on the basis of affected-sib-pair data. Vieland VJ; Huang J Am J Hum Genet; 2003 Aug; 73(2):223-32. PubMed ID: 12830401 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Some epistatic two-locus models of disease. I. Relative risks and identity-by-descent distributions in affected sib pairs. Hodge SE Am J Hum Genet; 1981 May; 33(3):381-95. PubMed ID: 6941695 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Two-locus models of disease: comparison of likelihood and nonparametric linkage methods. Goldin LR; Weeks DE Am J Hum Genet; 1993 Oct; 53(4):908-15. PubMed ID: 8213819 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. Power of sib-pair and sib-trio linkage analysis with assortative mating and multiple disease loci. Sribney WM; Swift M Am J Hum Genet; 1992 Oct; 51(4):773-84. PubMed ID: 1415221 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Multi-locus penetrance variance analysis method for association study in complex diseases. Sun X; Zhang Z; Zhang Y; Zhang X; Li Y Hum Hered; 2005; 60(3):143-9. PubMed ID: 16319491 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Direct power comparisons between simple LOD scores and NPL scores for linkage analysis in complex diseases. Abreu PC; Greenberg DA; Hodge SE Am J Hum Genet; 1999 Sep; 65(3):847-57. PubMed ID: 10441591 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Mathematical assumptions versus biological reality: myths in affected sib pair linkage analysis. Elston RC; Song D; Iyengar SK Am J Hum Genet; 2005 Jan; 76(1):152-6. PubMed ID: 15540158 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Some epistatic two-locus models of disease. II. The confounding of linkage and association. Hodge SE; Spence MA Am J Hum Genet; 1981 May; 33(3):396-406. PubMed ID: 6941696 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Linkage analysis in nuclear families. 1: Optimality criteria for affected sib-pair tests. Knapp M; Seuchter SA; Baur MP Hum Hered; 1994; 44(1):37-43. PubMed ID: 8163290 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Linkage analysis of two-locus diseases under single-locus and two-locus analysis models. Vieland V; Greenberg DA; Hodge SE; Ott J Cytogenet Cell Genet; 1992; 59(2-3):145-6. PubMed ID: 1737484 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Causal models for investigating complex genetic disease: II. what causal models can tell us about penetrance for additive, heterogeneity, and multiplicative two-locus models. Madsen AM; Ottman R; Hodge SE Hum Hered; 2011; 72(1):63-72. PubMed ID: 21912139 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Adequacy of single-locus approximations for linkage analyses of oligogenic traits: extension to multigenerational pedigree structures. Vieland VJ; Greenberg DA; Hodge SE Hum Hered; 1993; 43(6):329-36. PubMed ID: 8288263 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Linkage analysis in nuclear families. 2: Relationship between affected sib-pair tests and lod score analysis. Knapp M; Seuchter SA; Baur MP Hum Hered; 1994; 44(1):44-51. PubMed ID: 8163291 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]