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 *

214 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9066928)

  • 1. 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]  

  • 2. A comparison of sib-pair linkage tests for disease susceptibility loci.
    Blackwelder WC; Elston RC
    Genet Epidemiol; 1985; 2(1):85-97. PubMed ID: 3863778
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. Likelihood-based inference for the genetic relative risk based on affected-sibling-pair marker data.
    McKnight B; Tierney C; McGorray SP; Day NE
    Biometrics; 1998 Jun; 54(2):426-43. PubMed ID: 9629637
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. [The affected sib-set method: revision based on the mixed model using a conditional probability approach].
    Sergeev AS
    Genetika; 1991 Nov; 27(11):2020-33. PubMed ID: 1802788
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Affected sib-pair tests for linkage: type I errors with dependent sib-pairs.
    Meunier F; Philippi A; Martinez M; Demenais F
    Genet Epidemiol; 1997; 14(6):1107-11. PubMed ID: 9433632
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. The impact of varying diagnostic thresholds on affected sib pair linkage analysis.
    Kendler KS
    Genet Epidemiol; 1988; 5(6):407-19. PubMed ID: 3209053
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Two-stage global search designs for linkage analysis I: use of the mean statistic for affected sib pairs.
    Guo X; Elston RC
    Genet Epidemiol; 2000 Feb; 18(2):97-110. PubMed ID: 10642424
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Testing linkage and gene x environment interaction: comparison of different affected sib-pair methods.
    Dizier MH; Selinger-Leneman H; Genin E
    Genet Epidemiol; 2003 Jul; 25(1):73-9. PubMed ID: 12813728
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Model-free sib-pair linkage analysis: combining full-sib and half-sib pairs.
    Schaid DJ; Elston RC; Tran L; Wilson AF
    Genet Epidemiol; 2000 Jul; 19(1):30-51. PubMed ID: 10861895
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Maximum-Likelihood-Binomial method for genetic model-free linkage analysis of quantitative traits in sibships.
    Alcaïs A; Abel L
    Genet Epidemiol; 1999; 17(2):102-17. PubMed ID: 10414555
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Relationship estimation in affected sib pair analysis of late-onset diseases.
    Göring HH; Ott J
    Eur J Hum Genet; 1997; 5(2):69-77. PubMed ID: 9195155
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Detection of major genes underlying several quantitative traits associated with a common disease using different ascertainment schemes.
    Iyengar S; Calafell F; Kidd KK
    Genet Epidemiol; 1997; 14(6):809-14. PubMed ID: 9433582
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Affected-sib-pair test for linkage based on constraints for identical-by-descent distributions corresponding to disease models with imprinting.
    Knapp M; Strauch K
    Genet Epidemiol; 2004 May; 26(4):273-85. PubMed ID: 15095387
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Affected sib pair identity by state analyses.
    Thomson G; Motro U
    Genet Epidemiol; 1994; 11(4):353-64. PubMed ID: 7813897
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Hidden linkage: a comparison of the affected sib pair (ASP) test and transmission/disequilibrium test (TDT).
    McGinnis RE
    Ann Hum Genet; 1998 Mar; 62(Pt 2):159-79. PubMed ID: 9759477
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.