220 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21735171)
1. Artifact due to differential error when cases and controls are imputed from different platforms.
Sinnott JA; Kraft P
Hum Genet; 2012 Jan; 131(1):111-9. PubMed ID: 21735171
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Imputation across genotyping arrays for genome-wide association studies: assessment of bias and a correction strategy.
Johnson EO; Hancock DB; Levy JL; Gaddis NC; Saccone NL; Bierut LJ; Page GP
Hum Genet; 2013 May; 132(5):509-22. PubMed ID: 23334152
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. A new statistic to evaluate imputation reliability.
Lin P; Hartz SM; Zhang Z; Saccone SF; Wang J; Tischfield JA; Edenberg HJ; Kramer JR; M Goate A; Bierut LJ; Rice JP;
PLoS One; 2010 Mar; 5(3):e9697. PubMed ID: 20300623
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Comparison of the performance of two commercial genome-wide association study genotyping platforms in Han Chinese samples.
Jiang L; Willner D; Danoy P; Xu H; Brown MA
G3 (Bethesda); 2013 Jan; 3(1):23-9. PubMed ID: 23316436
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. 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]
6. Extending the use of GWAS data by combining data from different genetic platforms.
van Iperen EP; Hovingh GK; Asselbergs FW; Zwinderman AH
PLoS One; 2017; 12(2):e0172082. PubMed ID: 28245255
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Evaluating the effects of imputation on the power, coverage, and cost efficiency of genome-wide SNP platforms.
Anderson CA; Pettersson FH; Barrett JC; Zhuang JJ; Ragoussis J; Cardon LR; Morris AP
Am J Hum Genet; 2008 Jul; 83(1):112-9. PubMed ID: 18589396
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. An empirical evaluation of imputation accuracy for association statistics reveals increased type-I error rates in genome-wide associations.
Almeida MA; Oliveira PS; Pereira TV; Krieger JE; Pereira AC
BMC Genet; 2011 Jan; 12():10. PubMed ID: 21251252
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Estimation of Genetic Relationships Between Individuals Across Cohorts and Platforms: Application to Childhood Height.
Fedko IO; Hottenga JJ; Medina-Gomez C; Pappa I; van Beijsterveldt CE; Ehli EA; Davies GE; Rivadeneira F; Tiemeier H; Swertz MA; Middeldorp CM; Bartels M; Boomsma DI
Behav Genet; 2015 Sep; 45(5):514-28. PubMed ID: 26036992
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Imputation reliability on DNA biallelic markers for drug metabolism studies.
Mijatovic V; Iacobucci I; Sazzini M; Xumerle L; Mori A; Pignatti PF; Martinelli G; Malerba G
BMC Bioinformatics; 2012; 13 Suppl 14(Suppl 14):S7. PubMed ID: 23095502
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Using family-based imputation in genome-wide association studies with large complex pedigrees: the Framingham Heart Study.
Chen MH; Huang J; Chen WM; Larson MG; Fox CS; Vasan RS; Seshadri S; O'Donnell CJ; Yang Q
PLoS One; 2012; 7(12):e51589. PubMed ID: 23284720
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Imputation without doing imputation: a new method for the detection of non-genotyped causal variants.
Howey R; Cordell HJ
Genet Epidemiol; 2014 Apr; 38(3):173-90. PubMed ID: 24535679
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Hot topic: performance of bovine high-density genotyping platforms in Holsteins and Jerseys.
Rincon G; Weber KL; Eenennaam AL; Golden BL; Medrano JF
J Dairy Sci; 2011 Dec; 94(12):6116-21. PubMed ID: 22118099
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Analysis of untyped SNPs: maximum likelihood and imputation methods.
Hu YJ; Lin DY
Genet Epidemiol; 2010 Dec; 34(8):803-15. PubMed ID: 21104886
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Evaluating the effective numbers of independent tests and significant p-value thresholds in commercial genotyping arrays and public imputation reference datasets.
Li MX; Yeung JM; Cherny SS; Sham PC
Hum Genet; 2012 May; 131(5):747-56. PubMed ID: 22143225
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Comparison among three variant callers and assessment of the accuracy of imputation from SNP array data to whole-genome sequence level in chicken.
Ni G; Strom TM; Pausch H; Reimer C; Preisinger R; Simianer H; Erbe M
BMC Genomics; 2015 Oct; 16():824. PubMed ID: 26486989
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Comparison of genotyping using pooled DNA samples (allelotyping) and individual genotyping using the affymetrix genome-wide human SNP array 6.0.
Teumer A; Ernst FD; Wiechert A; Uhr K; Nauck M; Petersmann A; Völzke H; Völker U; Homuth G
BMC Genomics; 2013 Jul; 14():506. PubMed ID: 23885805
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Strategies and utility of imputed SNP genotypes for genomic analysis in dairy cattle.
Khatkar MS; Moser G; Hayes BJ; Raadsma HW
BMC Genomics; 2012 Oct; 13():538. PubMed ID: 23043356
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. PreCimp: Pre-collapsing imputation approach increases imputation accuracy of rare variants in terms of collapsed variables.
Kim YJ; Lee J; Kim BJ; ; Park T
Genet Epidemiol; 2017 Jan; 41(1):41-50. PubMed ID: 27859580
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. False positive findings during genome-wide association studies with imputation: influence of allele frequency and imputation accuracy.
Zhang Z; Xiao X; Zhou W; Zhu D; Amos CI
Hum Mol Genet; 2021 Dec; 31(1):146-155. PubMed ID: 34368847
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
