Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 48 out of 100. Genetics

Topic: Genetics and APOE

Functional phenotypes (e.g., subcortical surface representation), which commonly arise in imaging genetic studies, have been used to detect putative genes for complexly inherited neuropsychiatric and neurodegenerative disorders. However, existing statistical methods largely ignore the functional features (e.g., functional smoothness and correlation). The aim of this paper is to develop a functional genome-wide association analysis (FGWAS) framework to efficiently carry out whole-genome analyses of functional phenotypes. FGWAS consists of three components: a multivariate varying coefficient model, a global sure independence screening procedure, and a test procedure. Compared with the standard multivariate regression model, the multivariate varying coefficient model explicitly models the functional features of functional phenotypes through the integration of smooth coefficient functions and functional principal component analysis. Statistically, compared with existing methods for genome-wide association studies (GWAS), FGWAS can substantially boost the detection power for discovering important genetic variants influencing brain structure and function. Simulation studies show that FGWAS outperforms existing GWAS methods for searching sparse signals in an extremely large search space, while controlling for the family-wise error rate. We have successfully applied FGWAS to large-scale analysis of data from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative for 708 subjects, 30,000 vertices on the left and right hippocampal surfaces, and 501,584 SNPs.

Key findings

Study details

How this study scored 48/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record left out, no data; Study design 0 of 12; Strength of evidence 1 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 2 of 5; Sample size 2 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 3 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited left out, no data; Citations per year left out, no data; Impact for its field and year left out, no data; Cited by studies here left out, no data; Still being cited left out, no data; Senior author's track record left out, no data; Institution's track record left out, no data; Multi-centre collaboration left out, no data; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read left out, no data. 27 of the 56 points it could be judged on, which is 48 of 100. Total 48 of 100.27 of the 56 points we could judge = 48 of 100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, effect reported and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record, multi-centre collaboration and free to read, so those were left out: it earned 27 of the 56 points we could judge it on, which is 48 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (NeuroImage)
Journal's citation record — / 4 No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score
Study design 0 / 12 No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Strength of evidence 1 / 5 Rated “low” in our summary
Peer-review validation 10 / 10 Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent 2 / 5 2017 — within 10 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 2 / 4 708 participants
Effect reported 0 / 3 No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Studied in people 3 / 3 Studied in people (participant count stated)
Randomised / blinded 0 / 2 No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Times cited — / 7 No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score
Citations per year — / 5 No citation count or no year — left out of this score
Impact for its field and year — / 6 No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score
Cited by studies here — / 6 Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score
Still being cited — / 4 No yearly citation counts — left out of this score
Senior author's track record — / 4 Senior author's record not available — left out of this score
Institution's track record — / 3 No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score
Multi-centre collaboration — / 3 Institutions not listed — left out of this score
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 28735012)
Free to read — / 2 Access not recorded — left out of this score
Points 27 / 56 Scored on 10 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 27 of the 56 points we could judge it on is 48 out of 100.
Total 48 / 100 —

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record's author list ends in “et al.”, so not every author is named. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

APA 7th

Huang, C., Thompson, P., Wang, Y., Yu, Y., Zhang, J., Kong, D., et al. (2017). FGWAS: Functional genome wide association analysis. NeuroImage. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2017.07.030

Vancouver

Huang C, Thompson P, Wang Y, Yu Y, Zhang J, Kong D, et al. FGWAS: Functional genome wide association analysis. NeuroImage. 2017. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2017.07.030. PMID: 28735012.

BibTeX

@article{huang2017-28735012,
  author  = {Huang, Chao and Thompson, Paul and Wang, Yalin and Yu, Yang and Zhang, Jingwen and Kong, Dehan and Colen, Rivka R and Knickmeyer, Rebecca C and others},
  title   = {{FGWAS: Functional genome wide association analysis}},
  journal = {NeuroImage},
  year    = {2017},
  doi     = {10.1016/j.neuroimage.2017.07.030},
  pmid    = {28735012},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2017.07.030}
}

Related studies in Genetics

Also tagged “genetics”

346 studies in the library carry the topic tag “genetics”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 346 tagged studies.

Similar studies

More on Genetics

See all studies in Genetics →