English
 
Help Privacy Policy Disclaimer
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT
Add to Basket
  Local TagsRelease HistoryDetailsSummary

Released
Journal Article

Generalized Structured Component Analysis in candidate gene association studies: Applications and limitations [version 2; peer review: 3 approved]

MPS-Authors
/persons/resource/persons196260

Eising,  Else
Language and Genetics Department, MPI for Psycholinguistics, Max Planck Society;

/persons/resource/persons4427

Fisher,  Simon E.
Language and Genetics Department, MPI for Psycholinguistics, Max Planck Society;
Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, External Organizations;

External Resource

data via OSF
(Supplementary material)

Fulltext (restricted access)
There are currently no full texts shared for your IP range.
Fulltext (public)
Supplementary Material (public)
There is no public supplementary material available
Citation

Thompson, P. A., Bishop, D. V. M., Eising, E., Fisher, S. E., & Newbury, D. F. (2020). Generalized Structured Component Analysis in candidate gene association studies: Applications and limitations [version 2; peer review: 3 approved]. Wellcome Open Research, 4: 142. doi:10.12688/wellcomeopenres.15396.2.


Cite as: https://hdl.handle.net/21.11116/0000-0008-1084-0
Abstract
Background: Generalized Structured Component Analysis (GSCA) is a component-based alternative to traditional covariance-based structural equation modelling. This method has previously been applied to test for association between candidate genes and clinical phenotypes, contrasting with traditional genetic association analyses that adopt univariate testing of many individual single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) with correction for multiple testing.
Methods: We first evaluate the ability of the GSCA method to replicate two previous findings from a genetics association study of developmental language disorders. We then present the results of a simulation study to test the validity of the GSCA method under more restrictive data conditions, using smaller sample sizes and larger numbers of SNPs than have previously been investigated. Finally, we compare GSCA performance against univariate association analysis conducted using PLINK v1.9.
Results: Results from simulations show that power to detect effects depends not just on sample size, but also on the ratio of SNPs with effect to number of SNPs tested within a gene. Inclusion of many SNPs in a model dilutes true effects.
Conclusions: We propose that GSCA is a useful method for replication studies, when candidate SNPs have been identified, but should not be used for exploratory analysis.