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 *

187 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19339783)

  • 1. Evaluation of potential power gain with imputed genotypes in genome-wide association studies.
    Becker T; Flaquer A; Brockschmidt FF; Herold C; Steffens M
    Hum Hered; 2009; 68(1):23-34. PubMed ID: 19339783
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Evaluation of genome-wide power of genetic association studies based on empirical data from the HapMap project.
    Nannya Y; Taura K; Kurokawa M; Chiba S; Ogawa S
    Hum Mol Genet; 2007 Oct; 16(20):2494-505. PubMed ID: 17666406
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Accuracy of genotype imputation in sheep breeds.
    Hayes BJ; Bowman PJ; Daetwyler HD; Kijas JW; van der Werf JH
    Anim Genet; 2012 Feb; 43(1):72-80. PubMed ID: 22221027
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Imputation of missing single nucleotide polymorphism genotypes using a multivariate mixed model framework.
    Calus MP; Veerkamp RF; Mulder HA
    J Anim Sci; 2011 Jul; 89(7):2042-9. PubMed ID: 21357451
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. ProbABEL package for genome-wide association analysis of imputed data.
    Aulchenko YS; Struchalin MV; van Duijn CM
    BMC Bioinformatics; 2010 Mar; 11():134. PubMed ID: 20233392
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Imputation of genotypes from different single nucleotide polymorphism panels in dairy cattle.
    Druet T; Schrooten C; de Roos AP
    J Dairy Sci; 2010 Nov; 93(11):5443-54. PubMed ID: 20965360
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Methods for testing association between uncertain genotypes and quantitative traits.
    Kutalik Z; Johnson T; Bochud M; Mooser V; Vollenweider P; Waeber G; Waterworth D; Beckmann JS; Bergmann S
    Biostatistics; 2011 Jan; 12(1):1-17. PubMed ID: 20543033
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Significance levels in genome-wide interaction analysis (GWIA).
    Becker T; Herold C; Meesters C; Mattheisen M; Baur MP
    Ann Hum Genet; 2011 Jan; 75(1):29-35. PubMed ID: 20950400
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Accuracy of genome-wide imputation of untyped markers and impacts on statistical power for association studies.
    Hao K; Chudin E; McElwee J; Schadt EE
    BMC Genet; 2009 Jun; 10():27. PubMed ID: 19531258
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Accuracy of direct genomic values derived from imputed single nucleotide polymorphism genotypes in Jersey cattle.
    Weigel KA; de Los Campos G; Vazquez AI; Rosa GJ; Gianola D; Van Tassell CP
    J Dairy Sci; 2010 Nov; 93(11):5423-35. PubMed ID: 20965358
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Prediction of unobserved single nucleotide polymorphism genotypes of Jersey cattle using reference panels and population-based imputation algorithms.
    Weigel KA; Van Tassell CP; O'Connell JR; VanRaden PM; Wiggans GR
    J Dairy Sci; 2010 May; 93(5):2229-38. PubMed ID: 20412938
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The use of imputed sibling genotypes in sibship-based association analysis: on modeling alternatives, power and model misspecification.
    Minică CC; Dolan CV; Hottenga JJ; Willemsen G; Vink JM; Boomsma DI
    Behav Genet; 2013 May; 43(3):254-66. PubMed ID: 23519635
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. INTERSNP: genome-wide interaction analysis guided by a priori information.
    Herold C; Steffens M; Brockschmidt FF; Baur MP; Becker T
    Bioinformatics; 2009 Dec; 25(24):3275-81. PubMed ID: 19837719
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Measuring marker information content by the ambiguity of block boundaries observed in dense SNP data.
    Gu CC; Yu K; Boerwinkle E
    Ann Hum Genet; 2007 Jan; 71(Pt 1):127-40. PubMed ID: 16984487
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Alternative methods for H1 simulations in genome-wide association studies.
    Perduca V; Sinoquet C; Mourad R; Nuel G
    Hum Hered; 2012; 73(2):95-104. PubMed ID: 22472690
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Effect of genome-wide genotyping and reference panels on rare variants imputation.
    Zheng HF; Ladouceur M; Greenwood CM; Richards JB
    J Genet Genomics; 2012 Oct; 39(10):545-50. PubMed ID: 23089364
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. GSEA-SNP: applying gene set enrichment analysis to SNP data from genome-wide association studies.
    Holden M; Deng S; Wojnowski L; Kulle B
    Bioinformatics; 2008 Dec; 24(23):2784-5. PubMed ID: 18854360
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Evaluating coverage of genome-wide association studies.
    Barrett JC; Cardon LR
    Nat Genet; 2006 Jun; 38(6):659-62. PubMed ID: 16715099
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Optimal two-stage genotyping designs for genome-wide association scans.
    Wang H; Thomas DC; Pe'er I; Stram DO
    Genet Epidemiol; 2006 May; 30(4):356-68. PubMed ID: 16607626
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Evaluating and improving power in whole-genome association studies using fixed marker sets.
    Pe'er I; de Bakker PI; Maller J; Yelensky R; Altshuler D; Daly MJ
    Nat Genet; 2006 Jun; 38(6):663-7. PubMed ID: 16715096
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.