Methods for meta-analyses of genome-wide association studies: Critical assessment of empirical evidence

There has been a steep increase in the number of meta-analyses of genome-wide association (GWA) studies aimed at identifying genetic variants with increasingly smaller effects, but pressure to publish findings of new genetic associations has limited the time available for careful consideration of al...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Martin Gögele, Cosetta Minelli, Ammarin Thakkinstian, Alex Yurkiewich, Cristian Pattaro, Peter P. Pramstaller, Julian Little, John Attia, John R. Thompson
Other Authors: EURAC Research
Format: Article
Published: 2018
Subjects:
Online Access:https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/123456789/14837
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Institution: Mahidol University
id th-mahidol.14837
record_format dspace
spelling th-mahidol.148372018-06-11T12:12:41Z Methods for meta-analyses of genome-wide association studies: Critical assessment of empirical evidence Martin Gögele Cosetta Minelli Ammarin Thakkinstian Alex Yurkiewich Cristian Pattaro Peter P. Pramstaller Julian Little John Attia John R. Thompson EURAC Research Mahidol University University of Ottawa, Canada University of Newcastle, Australia University of Leicester Medicine There has been a steep increase in the number of meta-analyses of genome-wide association (GWA) studies aimed at identifying genetic variants with increasingly smaller effects, but pressure to publish findings of new genetic associations has limited the time available for careful consideration of all of their methodological aspects. The authors surveyed the literature (2007-2010) to provide empirical evidence on the methods used in GWA meta-analyses, including their organization, requirements about the uniformity of methods used in primary studies, methods for data pooling, investigation of between-study heterogeneity, and quality of reporting. This review showed that a great variety of methods are being used, but the rationale for their choice is often unclear. It also highlights how important methodological aspects have received insufficient attention, potentially leading to missed opportunities for improving gene discovery and characterization. Evaluation of power to replicate findings was inadequate, and the number of variants selected for replication was not associated with replication sample size. A low proportion of GWA meta-analyses investigated the presence and magnitude of heterogeneity, even when there was little uniformity in methods used in primary studies. More methodological work is required before clear guidance can be offered as to optimal methods or tradeoffs between alternative methods. However, there is a clear need for guidelines for reporting the results of GWA meta-analyses. © The Author 2012. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. All rights reserved. 2018-06-11T05:12:41Z 2018-06-11T05:12:41Z 2012-04-15 Article American Journal of Epidemiology. Vol.175, No.8 (2012), 739-749 10.1093/aje/kwr385 14766256 00029262 2-s2.0-84859731474 https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/123456789/14837 Mahidol University SCOPUS https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84859731474&origin=inward
institution Mahidol University
building Mahidol University Library
continent Asia
country Thailand
Thailand
content_provider Mahidol University Library
collection Mahidol University Institutional Repository
topic Medicine
spellingShingle Medicine
Martin Gögele
Cosetta Minelli
Ammarin Thakkinstian
Alex Yurkiewich
Cristian Pattaro
Peter P. Pramstaller
Julian Little
John Attia
John R. Thompson
Methods for meta-analyses of genome-wide association studies: Critical assessment of empirical evidence
description There has been a steep increase in the number of meta-analyses of genome-wide association (GWA) studies aimed at identifying genetic variants with increasingly smaller effects, but pressure to publish findings of new genetic associations has limited the time available for careful consideration of all of their methodological aspects. The authors surveyed the literature (2007-2010) to provide empirical evidence on the methods used in GWA meta-analyses, including their organization, requirements about the uniformity of methods used in primary studies, methods for data pooling, investigation of between-study heterogeneity, and quality of reporting. This review showed that a great variety of methods are being used, but the rationale for their choice is often unclear. It also highlights how important methodological aspects have received insufficient attention, potentially leading to missed opportunities for improving gene discovery and characterization. Evaluation of power to replicate findings was inadequate, and the number of variants selected for replication was not associated with replication sample size. A low proportion of GWA meta-analyses investigated the presence and magnitude of heterogeneity, even when there was little uniformity in methods used in primary studies. More methodological work is required before clear guidance can be offered as to optimal methods or tradeoffs between alternative methods. However, there is a clear need for guidelines for reporting the results of GWA meta-analyses. © The Author 2012. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. All rights reserved.
author2 EURAC Research
author_facet EURAC Research
Martin Gögele
Cosetta Minelli
Ammarin Thakkinstian
Alex Yurkiewich
Cristian Pattaro
Peter P. Pramstaller
Julian Little
John Attia
John R. Thompson
format Article
author Martin Gögele
Cosetta Minelli
Ammarin Thakkinstian
Alex Yurkiewich
Cristian Pattaro
Peter P. Pramstaller
Julian Little
John Attia
John R. Thompson
author_sort Martin Gögele
title Methods for meta-analyses of genome-wide association studies: Critical assessment of empirical evidence
title_short Methods for meta-analyses of genome-wide association studies: Critical assessment of empirical evidence
title_full Methods for meta-analyses of genome-wide association studies: Critical assessment of empirical evidence
title_fullStr Methods for meta-analyses of genome-wide association studies: Critical assessment of empirical evidence
title_full_unstemmed Methods for meta-analyses of genome-wide association studies: Critical assessment of empirical evidence
title_sort methods for meta-analyses of genome-wide association studies: critical assessment of empirical evidence
publishDate 2018
url https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/123456789/14837
_version_ 1763492010222682112