Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
European Journal of Epidemiology
Published in: European Journal of Epidemiology 1/2009

Open Access 01-01-2009 | Genetic epidemiology

Strengthening the reporting of genetic association studies (STREGA): an extension of the STROBE statement

Authors: Julian Little, Julian P. T. Higgins, John P. A. Ioannidis, David Moher, France Gagnon, Erik von Elm, Muin J. Khoury, Barbara Cohen, George Davey-Smith, Jeremy Grimshaw, Paul Scheet, Marta Gwinn, Robin E. Williamson, Guang Yong Zou, Kim Hutchings, Candice Y. Johnson, Valerie Tait, Miriam Wiens, Jean Golding, Cornelia van Duijn, John McLaughlin, Andrew Paterson, George Wells, Isabel Fortier, Matthew Freedman, Maja Zecevic, Richard King, Claire Infante-Rivard, Alex Stewart, Nick Birkett

Published in: European Journal of Epidemiology | Issue 1/2009

Login to get access

Abstract

Making sense of rapidly evolving evidence on genetic associations is crucial to making genuine advances in human genomics and the eventual integration of this information in the practice of medicine and public health. Assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of this evidence, and hence the ability to synthesize it, has been limited by inadequate reporting of results. The STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association studies (STREGA) initiative builds on the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement and provides additions to 12 of the 22 items on the STROBE checklist. The additions concern population stratification, genotyping errors, modeling haplotype variation, Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium, replication, selection of participants, rationale for choice of genes and variants, treatment effects in studying quantitative traits, statistical methods, relatedness, reporting of descriptive and outcome data, and the volume of data issues that are important to consider in genetic association studies. The STREGA recommendations do not prescribe or dictate how a genetic association study should be designed but seek to enhance the transparency of its reporting, regardless of choices made during design, conduct, or analysis.
Literature
1.
Khoury MJ, Little J, Burke W. Human genome epidemiology: scope and strategies. In: Khoury MJ, Little J, Burke W, editors. Human genome epidemiology. New York: Oxford University Press; 2004. p. 3–16.
2.
Genomics Health and Society Working Group. Genomics, health and society. Emerging issues for public policy. Ottawa: Government of Canada Policy Research Initiative; 2004.
3.
Lin BK, Clyne M, Walsh M, Gomez O, Yu W, Gwinn M, et al. Tracking the epidemiology of human genes in the literature: the HuGE published literature database. Am J Epidemiol. 2006;164:1–4.PubMedCrossRef
4.
5.
Lawrence RW, Evans DM, Cardon LR. Prospects and pitfalls in whole genome association studies. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2005;360:1589–95.PubMedCrossRef
6.
Thomas DC. Are we ready for genome-wide association studies? Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2006;15:595–8.PubMedCrossRef
7.
Khoury MJ, Little J, Gwinn M, Ioannidis JP. On the synthesis and interpretation of consistent but weak gene-disease associations in the era of genome-wide association studies. Int J Epidemiol. 2007;36:439–45.PubMedCrossRef
8.
Little J, Khoury MJ, Bradley L, Clyne M, Gwinn M, Lin B, et al. The human genome project is complete. How do we develop a handle for the pump? Am J Epidemiol. 2003;157:667–73.PubMedCrossRef
9.
Ioannidis JP, Bernstein J, Boffetta P, Danesh J, Dolan S, Hartge P, et al. A network of investigator networks in human genome epidemiology. Am J Epidemiol. 2005;162:302–4.PubMedCrossRef
10.
Ioannidis JP, Gwinn M, Little J, Higgins JP, Bernstein JL, Boffetta P, et al. A road map for efficient and reliable human genome epidemiology. Nat Genet. 2006;38:3–5.PubMedCrossRef
11.
von Elm E, Egger M. The scandal of poor epidemiological research. BMJ. 2004;329:868–9.CrossRef
12.
Nature Genetics. Freely associating (editorial). Nat Genet 1999;22:1–2.
13.
14.
Weiss S. Association studies in asthma genetics. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2001;164:2014–5.PubMed
15.
Weiss ST, Silverman EK, Palmer LJ. Case-control association studies in pharmacogenetics. Pharmacogenomic J. 2001;1:157–8.
16.
Cooper DN, Nussbaum RL, Krawczak M. Proposed guidelines for papers describing DNA polymorphism–disease associations. Hum Genet. 2002;110:208.
17.
Hegele R. SNP judgements and freedom of association. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2002;22:1058–61.PubMedCrossRef
18.
Little J, Bradley L, Bray MS, Clyne M, Dorman J, Ellsworth DL, et al. Reporting, appraising, and integrating data on genotype prevalence and gene-disease associations. Am J Epidemiol. 2002;156:300–10.PubMed
19.
Romero R, Kuivaniemi H, Tromp G, Olson JM. The design, execution, and interpretation of genetic association studies to decipher complex diseases. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002;187:1299–312.PubMedCrossRef
20.
Colhoun HM, McKeigue PM, Davey Smith G. Problems of reporting genetic associations with complex outcomes. Lancet. 2003;361:865–72.PubMedCrossRef
21.
van Duijn CM, Porta M. Good prospects for genetic and molecular epidemiologic studies in the European journal of epidemiology. Eur J Epidemiol. 2003;18:285–6.PubMedCrossRef
22.
Crossman D, Watkins H. Jesting Pilate, genetic case-control association studies, and heart. Heart. 2004;90:831–2.PubMedCrossRef
23.
Huizinga TW, Pisetsky DS, Kimberly RP. Associations, populations, and the truth: recommendations for genetic association studies in arthritis & rheumatism. Arthritis Rheum. 2004;50:2066–71.PubMedCrossRef
24.
Little J. Reporting and review of human genome epidemiology studies. In: Khoury MJ, Little J, Burke W, editors. Human genome epidemiology: a scientific foundation for using genetic information to improve health and prevent disease. New York: Oxford University Press; 2004. p. 168–92.
25.
Rebbeck TR, Martinez ME, Sellers TA, Shields PG, Wild CP, Potter JD. Genetic variation and cancer: improving the environment for publication of association studies. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2004;13:1985–6.PubMed
26.
Tan N, Mulley J, Berkovic S. Association studies in epilepsy: “the truth is out there”. Epilepsia. 2004;45:1429–42.PubMedCrossRef
27.
Anonymous. Framework for a fully powered risk engine. Nat Genet 2005;37:1153.
28.
Ehm MG, Nelson MR, Spurr NK. Guidelines for conducting and reporting whole genome/large-scale association studies. Hum Mol Genet. 2005;14:2485–8.PubMedCrossRef
29.
Freimer NB, Sabatti C. Guidelines for association studies in human molecular genetics. Hum Mol Genet. 2005;14:2481–3.PubMedCrossRef
30.
Hattersley AT, McCarthy MI. What makes a good genetic association study? Lancet. 2005;366:1315–23.PubMedCrossRef
31.
Manly K. Reliability of statistical associations between genes and disease. Immunogenetics. 2005;57:549–58.PubMedCrossRef
32.
Shen H, Liu Y, Liu P, Recker R, Deng H. Nonreplication in genetic studies of complex diseases—lessons learned from studies of osteoporosis and tentative remedies. J Bone Miner Res. 2005;20:365–76.PubMedCrossRef
33.
Vitali S, Randolph A. Assessing the quality of case-control association studies on the genetic basis of sepsis. Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2005;6:S74–7.PubMedCrossRef
34.
Wedzicha JA, Hall IP. Publising genetic association studies in Thorax. Thorax. 2005;60:357.CrossRef
35.
36.
DeLisi LE, Faraone SV. When is a “positive” association truly a “positive” in psychiatric genetics? A commentary based on issues debated at the World Congress of Psychiatric Genetics, Boston, October 12–18, 2005. Am J Med Genet B Neuropsychiatr Genet. 2006;141:319–22.
37.
Saito YA, Talley NJ, de Andrade M, Petersen GM. Case-control genetic association studies in gastrointestinal disease: review and recommendations. Am J Gastroenterol. 2006;101:1379–89.PubMedCrossRef
38.
Uhlig K, Menon V, Schmid CH. Recommendations for reporting of clinical research studies. Am J Kidney Dis. 2007;49:3–7.PubMedCrossRef
39.
NCI-NHGRI Working Group on Replication in Association Studies, Chanock SJ, Manolio T, Boehnke M, Boerwinkle E, Hunter DJ, et al. Replicating genotype–phenotype associations. Nature. 2007;447:655–60.PubMedCrossRef
40.
Begg CB. Reflections on publication criteria for genetic association studies. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2005;14:1364–5.PubMedCrossRef
41.
Byrnes G, Gurrin L, Dowty J, Hopper JL. Publication policy or publication bias? Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2005;14:1363.PubMedCrossRef
42.
Pharoah PD, Dunning AM, Ponder BA, Easton DF. The reliable identification of disease–gene associations. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2005;14:1362.PubMedCrossRef
43.
Wacholder S. Publication environment and broad investigation of the genome. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2005;14:1361.PubMedCrossRef
44.
Whittemore AS. Genetic association studies: time for a new paradigm? Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2005;14:1359–60.PubMedCrossRef
45.
Bogardus ST Jr, Concato J, Feinstein AR. Clinical epidemiological quality in molecular genetic research. The need for methodological standards. JAMA. 1999;281:1919–26.PubMedCrossRef
46.
Peters DL, Barber RC, Flood EM, Garner HR, O’Keefe GE. Methodologic quality and genotyping reproducibility in studies of tumor necrosis factor -308 G–> A. A single nucleotide polymorphism and bacterial sepsis: implications for studies of complex traits. Crit Care Med. 2003;31:1691–6.PubMedCrossRef
47.
Clark MF, Baudouin SV. A systematic review of the quality of genetic association studies in human sepsis. Intensive Care Med. 2006;32:1706–12.PubMedCrossRef
48.
Lee W, Bindman J, Ford T, Glozier N, Moran P, Stewart R, et al. Bias in psychiatric case-control studies: literature survey. Br J Psychiatry. 2007;190:204–9.PubMedCrossRef
49.
Yesupriya A, Evangelou E, Kavvoura FK, Patsopoulos NA, Clyne M, Walsh M, et al. Reporting of human genome epidemiology (HuGE) association studies: an empirical assessment. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2008;8:31.PubMedCrossRef
50.
Reid MC, Lachs MS, Feinstein AR. Use of methodological standards in diagnostic test research. Getting better but still not good. JAMA. 1995;274:645–51.PubMedCrossRef
51.
Brazma A, Hingamp P, Quackenbush J, Sherlock G, Spellman P, Stoeckert C, et al. Minimum information about a microarray experiment (MIAME)—toward standards for microarray data. Nat Genet. 2001;29:356–71.CrossRef
52.
Pocock SJ, Collier TJ, Dandreo KJ, de Stavola BL, Goldman MB, Kalish LA, et al. Issues in the reporting of epidemiological studies: a survey of recent practice. BMJ. 2004;329:883.PubMedCrossRef
53.
Altman D, Moher D. Developing guidelines for reporting healthcare research: scientific rationale and procedures. Med Clin (Barc). 2005;125:8–13.CrossRef
54.
55.
von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gotzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP, et al. The strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. PLoS Med. 2007;4:e296.CrossRef
56.
Vandenbroucke JP, von Elm E, Altman DG, Gotzsche PC, Mulrow CD, Pocock SJ, et al. Strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE): explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med. 2007;147:W163–94.PubMed
57.
58.
Higgins JP, Little J, Ioannidis JP, Bray MS, Manolio TA, Smeeth L, et al. Turning the pump handle: evolving methods for integrating the evidence on gene–disease association. Am J Epidemiol. 2007;166:863–6.PubMedCrossRef
59.
Altman DG, Schulz KF, Moher D, Egger M, Davidoff F, Elbourne D, et al. The revised CONSORT statement for reporting randomized trials: explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med. 2001;134:663–94.PubMed
60.
Moher D, Schultz KF, Altman D. The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomized trials. JAMA. 2001;285:1987–91.PubMedCrossRef
61.
Pompanon F, Bonin A, Bellemain E, Taberlet P. Genotyping errors: causes, consequences and solutions. Nat Rev Genet. 2005;6:847–59.PubMedCrossRef
62.
Akey JM, Zhang K, Xiong M, Doris P, Jin L. The effect that genotyping errors have on the robustness of common linkage-disequilibrium measures. Am J Hum Genet. 2001;68:1447–56.PubMedCrossRef
63.
Dequeker E, Ramsden S, Grody WW, Stenzel TT, Barton DE. Quality control in molecular genetic testing. Nat Rev Genet. 2001;2:717–23.PubMedCrossRef
64.
Mitchell AA, Cutler DJ, Chakravarti A. Undetected genotyping errors cause apparent overtransmission of common alleles in the transmission/disequilibrium test. Am J Hum Genet. 2003;72:598–610.PubMedCrossRef
65.
Rothman N, Stewart WF, Caporaso NE, Hayes RB. Misclassification of genetic susceptibility biomarkers: implications for case-control studies and cross-population comparisons. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 1993;2:299–303.PubMed
66.
Garcia-Closas M, Wacholder S, Caporaso N, Rothman N. Inference issues in cohort and case-control studies of genetic effects and gene-environment interactions. In: Khoury MJ, Little J, Burke W, editors. Human genome epidemiology: a scientific foundation for using genetic information to improve health and prevent disease. New York: Oxford University Press; 2004. p. 127–44.
67.
Wong MY, Day NE, Luan JA, Wareham NJ. Estimation of magnitude in gene–environment interactions in the presence of measurement error. Stat Med. 2004;23:987–98.PubMedCrossRef
68.
Clayton DG, Walker NM, Smyth DJ, Pask R, Cooper JD, Maier LM, et al. Population structure, differential bias and genomic control in a large-scale, case-control association study. Nat Genet. 2005;37:1243–6.PubMedCrossRef
69.
Knowler WC, Williams RC, Pettitt DJ, Steinberg AG. Gm3;5, 13, 14 and type 2 diabetes mellitus: an association in American Indians with genetic admixture. Am J Human Genet. 1988;43:520–6.
70.
Gelernter J, Goldman D, Risch N. The A1 allele at the D2 dopamine receptor gene and alcoholism: a reappraisal. JAMA. 1993;269:1673–7.PubMedCrossRef
71.
Kittles RA, Chen W, Panguluri RK, Ahaghotu C, Jackson A, Adebamowo CA, et al. CYP3A4-V and prostate cancer in African Americans: causal or confounding association because of population stratification? Hum Genet. 2002;110:553–60.PubMedCrossRef
72.
Thomas DC, Witte JS. Point: population stratification: a problem for case control studies of candidate-gene associations? Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2002;11:505–12.PubMed
73.
Wacholder S, Chatterjee N, Hartge P. Joint effects of genes and environment distorted by selection biases: implications for hospital-based case-control studies. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2002;11:885–9.PubMed
74.
Cardon LR, Palmer LJ. Population stratification and spurious allelic association. Lancet. 2003;361:598–604.PubMedCrossRef
75.
Wacholder S, Rothman N, Caporaso N. Population stratification in epidemiologic studies of common genetic variants and cancer: quantification of bias. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000;92:1151–8.PubMedCrossRef
76.
Ardlie KG, Lunetta KL, Seielstad M. Testing for population subdivision and association in four case-control studies. Am J Human Genet. 2002;71:304–11.CrossRef
77.
Edland SD, Slager S, Farrer M. Genetic association studies in Alzheimer’s disease research: challenges and opportunities. Stat Med. 2004;23:169–78.PubMedCrossRef
78.
Millikan RC. Re: population stratification in epidemiologic studies of common genetic variants and cancer: quantification of bias. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2001;93:156–7.PubMedCrossRef
79.
Wang Y, Localio R, Rebbeck TR. Evaluating bias due to population stratification in case-control association studies of admixed populations. Genet Epidemiol. 2004;27:14–20.PubMedCrossRef
80.
Ioannidis JP, Ntzani EE, Trikalinos TA. ‘Racial’ differences in genetic effects for complex diseases. Nat Genet. 2004;36:1312–8.PubMedCrossRef
81.
Marchini J, Cardon LR, Phillips MS, Donnelly P. The effects of human population structure on large genetic association studies. Nat Genet. 2004;36:512–7.PubMedCrossRef
82.
Freedman ML, Reich D, Penney KL, McDonald GJ, Mignault AA, Patterson N, et al. Assessing the impact of population stratification on genetic association studies. Nat Genet. 2004;36:388–93.PubMedCrossRef
83.
Khlat M, Cazes MH, Genin E, Guiguet M. Robustness of case-control studies of genetic factors to population stratification: magnitude of bias and type I error. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2004;13:1660–4.PubMed
84.
Balding DJ. A tutorial on statistical methods for population association studies. Nat Rev Genet. 2006;7:781–91.PubMedCrossRef
85.
Wellcome Trust Case Control Consortium. Genome-wide association study of 14,000 cases of seven common diseases and 3, 000 shared controls. Nature. 2007;447:661–78.CrossRef
86.
Ioannidis JP. Non-replication and inconsistency in the genome-wide association setting. Hum Hered. 2007;64:203–13.PubMedCrossRef
87.
Parkes M, Barrett JC, Prescott NJ, Tremelling M, Anderson CA, Fisher SA, et al. Sequence variants in the autophagy gene IRGM and multiple other replicating loci contribute to Crohn’s disease susceptibility. Nat Genet. 2007;39:830–2.PubMedCrossRef
88.
Todd JA, Walker NM, Cooper JD, Smyth DJ, Downes K, Plagnol V, et al. Robust associations of four new chromosome regions from genome-wide analyses of type 1 diabetes. Nat Genet. 2007;39:857–64.PubMedCrossRef
89.
Zeggini E, Weedon MN, Lindgren CM, Frayling TM, Elliott KS, Lango H, et al. Replication of genome-wide association signals in UK samples reveals risk loci for type 2 diabetes. Science. 2007;316:1336–41.PubMedCrossRef
90.
Diabetes Genetics Initiative of Broad Institute of Harvard and MIT, Lund University, and Novartis Institutes of BioMedical Research, Saxena R, Voight BF, Lyssenko V, Burtt NP, de Bakker PI, et al. Genome-wide association analysis identifies loci for type 2 diabetes and triglyceride levels. Science. 2007;316:1331–6.PubMedCrossRef
91.
Scott LJ, Mohlke KL, Bonnycastle LL, Willer CJ, Li Y, Duren WL, et al. A genome-wide association study of type 2 diabetes in Finns detects multiple susceptibility variants. Science. 2007;316:1341–5.PubMedCrossRef
92.
Helgadottir A, Thorleifsson G, Manolescu A, Gretarsdottir S, Blondal T, Jonasdottir A, et al. A common variant on chromosome 9p21 affects the risk of myocardial infarction. Science. 2007;316:1491–3.PubMedCrossRef
93.
McPherson R, Pertsemlidis A, Kavaslar N, Stewart A, Roberts R, Cox DR, et al. A common allele on chromosome 9 associated with coronary heart disease. Science. 2007;316:1488–91.PubMedCrossRef
94.
Easton DF, Pooley KA, Dunning AM, Pharoah PD, Thompson D, Ballinger DG, et al. Genome-wide association study identifies novel breast cancer susceptibility loci. Nature. 2007;447:1087–93.PubMedCrossRef
95.
Hunter DJ, Kraft P, Jacobs KB, Cox DG, Yeager M, Hankinson SE, et al. A genome-wide association study identifies alleles in FGFR2 associated with risk of sporadic postmenopausal breast cancer. Nat Genet. 2007;39:870–4.PubMedCrossRef
96.
Stacey SN, Manolescu A, Sulem P, Rafnar T, Gudmundsson J, Gudjonsson SA, et al. Common variants on chromosomes 2q35 and 16q12 confer susceptibility to estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. Nat Genet. 2007;39:865–9.PubMedCrossRef
97.
Gudmundsson J, Sulem P, Steinthorsdottir V, Bergthorsson JT, Thorleifsson G, Manolescu A, et al. Two variants on chromosome 17 confer prostate cancer risk, and the one in TCF2 protects against type 2 diabetes. Nat Genet. 2007;39:977–83.PubMedCrossRef
98.
Haiman CA, Patterson N, Freedman ML, Myers SR, Pike MC, Waliszewska A, et al. Multiple regions within 8q24 independently affect risk for prostate cancer. Nat Genet. 2007;39:638–44.PubMedCrossRef
99.
Yeager M, Orr N, Hayes RB, Jacobs KB, Kraft P, Wacholder S, et al. Genome-wide association study of prostate cancer identifies a second risk locus at 8q24. Nat Genet. 2007;39:645–9.PubMedCrossRef
100.
Zanke BW, Greenwood CM, Rangrej J, Kustra R, Tenesa A, Farrington SM, et al. Genome-wide association scan identifies a colorectal cancer susceptibility locus on chromosome 8q24. Nat Genet. 2007;39:989–94.PubMedCrossRef
101.
Tomlinson I, Webb E, Carvajal-Carmona L, Broderick P, Kemp Z, Spain S, et al. A genome-wide association scan of tag SNPs identifies a susceptibility variant for colorectal cancer at 8q24.21. Nat Genet. 2007;39:984–8.PubMedCrossRef
102.
Haiman CA, Le Marchand L, Yamamoto J, Stram DO, Sheng X, Kolonel LN, et al. A common genetic risk factor for colorectal and prostate cancer. Nat Genet. 2007;39:954–6.PubMedCrossRef
103.
Rioux JD, Xavier RJ, Taylor KD, Silverberg MS, Goyette P, Huett A, et al. Genome-wide association study identifies new susceptibility loci for Crohn disease and implicates autophagy in disease pathogenesis. Nat Genet. 2007;39:596–604.PubMedCrossRef
104.
Libioulle C, Louis E, Hansoul S, Sandor C, Farnir F, Franchimont D, et al. Novel Crohn disease locus identified by genome-wide association maps to a gene desert on 5p13.1 and modulates expression of PTGER4. PLoS Genet. 2007;3:e58.PubMedCrossRef
105.
Duerr RH, Taylor KD, Brant SR, Rioux JD, Silverberg MS, Daly MJ, et al. A genome-wide association study identifies IL23R as an inflammatory bowel disease gene. Science. 2006;314:1461–3.PubMedCrossRef
106.
Zhao LP, Li SS, Khalid N. A method for the assessment of disease associations with single-nucleotide polymorphism haplotypes and environmental variables in case-control studies. Am J Hum Genet. 2003;72:1231–50.PubMedCrossRef
107.
International HapMap Consortium, Frazer KA, Ballinger DG, Cox DR, Hinds DA, Stuve LL, et al. A second generation human haplotype map of over 3.1 million SNPs. Nature. 2007;449:851–61.PubMedCrossRef
108.
Stephens M, Smith NJ, Donnelly P. A new statistical method for haplotype reconstruction from population data. Am J Hum Genet. 2001;68:978–89.PubMedCrossRef
109.
Qin ZS, Niu T, Liu JS. Partition-ligation-expectation-maximization algorithm for haplotype inference with single-nucleotide polymorphisms. Am J Hum Genet. 2002;71:1242–7.PubMedCrossRef
110.
Scheet P, Stephens M. A fast and flexible statistical model for large-scale population genotype data: applications to inferring missing genotypes and haplotypic phase. Am J Hum Genet. 2006;78:629–44.PubMedCrossRef
111.
Browning SR. Missing data imputation and haplotype phase inference for genome-wide association studies. Hum Genet. 2008;124:439–50.PubMedCrossRef
112.
Huang Q, Fu YX, Boerwinkle E. Comparison of strategies for selecting single nucleotide polymorphisms for case/control association studies. Hum Genet. 2003;113:253–7.PubMedCrossRef
113.
Kamatani N, Sekine A, Kitamoto T, Iida A, Saito S, Kogame A, et al. Large-scale single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) and haplotype analyses, using dense SNP maps, of 199 drug-related genes in 752 subjects: the analysis of the association between uncommon SNPs within haplotype blocks and the haplotypes constructed with haplotype-tagging SNPs. Am J Hum Genet. 2004;75:190–203.PubMedCrossRef
114.
Zhang W, Collins A, Morton NE. Does haplotype diversity predict power for association mapping of disease susceptibility? Hum Genet. 2004;115:157–64.PubMedCrossRef
115.
Carlson CS, Eberle MA, Rieder MJ, Yi Q, Kruglyak L, Nickerson DA. Selecting a maximally informative set of single-nucleotide polymorphisms for association analysis using linkage disequilibrium. Am J Hum Genet. 2004;74:106–20.PubMedCrossRef
116.
a Vlieg A, Sandkuijl LA, Rosendaal FR, Bertina RM, Vos HL. Candidate gene approach in association studies: would the factor V Leiden mutation have been found by this approach? Eur J Hum Genet. 2004;12:478–82.CrossRef
117.
Greenspan G, Geiger D. Model-based inference of haplotype block variation. J Comput Biol. 2004;11:493–504.PubMedCrossRef
118.
Kimmel G, Shamir R. GERBIL: genotype resolution and block identification using likelihood. ProcNatl Acad Sci USA. 2005;102:158–62.CrossRef
119.
Cardon LR, Abecasis GR. Using haplotype blocks to map human complex triat loci. Trends Genet. 2003;19:135–40.PubMedCrossRef
120.
Ke X, Hunt S, Tapper W, Lawrence R, Stavrides G, Ghori J, et al. The impact of SNP density on fine-scale patterns of linkage disequilibrium. Hum Mol Genet. 2004;13:577–88.PubMedCrossRef
121.
Servin B, Stephens M. Imputation-based analysis of association studies: candidate regions and quantitative traits. PLoS Genet. 2007;3:e114.PubMedCrossRef
122.
Marchini J, Howie B, Myers S, McVean G, Donnelly P. A new multipoint method for genome-wide association studies by imputation of genotypes. Nat Genet. 2007;39:906–13.PubMedCrossRef
123.
124.
Weinberg W. Über den Nachweis der Vererbung beim Menschen. Jahrhefte des Vereines für Vaterländische Naturkunde in Württemberg. 1908;64:368–82.
125.
Minelli C, Thompson JR, Abrams KR, Thakkinstian A, Attia J. How should we use information about HWE in the meta-analyses of genetic association studies? Int J Epidemiol. 2008;37:136–46.PubMedCrossRef
126.
Xu J, Turner A, Little J, Bleecker ER, Meyers DA. Positive results in association studies are associated with departure from Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium: hint for genotyping error? Hum Genet. 2002;111:573–4.PubMedCrossRef
127.
Hosking L, Lumsden S, Lewis K, Yeo A, McCarthy L, Bansal A, et al. Detection of genotyping errors by Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium testing. Eur J Hum Genet. 2004;12:395–9.PubMedCrossRef
128.
Salanti G, Amountza G, Ntzani EE, Ioannidis JP. Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium in genetic association studies: an empirical evaluation of reporting, deviations, and power. Eur J Hum Genet. 2005;13:840–8.PubMedCrossRef
129.
Pearson TA, Manolio TA. How to interpret a genome-wide association study. JAMA. 2008;299:1335–44.PubMedCrossRef
130.
McCarthy MI, Abecasis GR, Cardon LR, Goldstein DB, Little J, Ioannidis JP, et al. Genome-wide association studies for complex traits: consensus, uncertainty and challenges. Nat Rev Genet. 2008;9:356–69.PubMedCrossRef
131.
Zou GY, Donner A. The merits of testing Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium in the analysis of unmatched case-control data: a cautionary note. Ann Hum Genet. 2006;70:923–33.PubMedCrossRef
132.
Shoemaker J, Painter I, Weir BS. A Bayesian characterization of Hardy–Weinberg disequilibrium. Genetics. 1998;149:2079–88.PubMed
133.
Ayres KL, Balding DJ. Measuring departures from Hardy–Weinberg: a Markov chain Monte Carlo method for estimating the inbreeding coefficient. Heredity. 1998;80(Pt 6):769–77.PubMedCrossRef
134.
Trikalinos TA, Salanti G, Khoury MJ, Ioannidis JP. Impact of violations and deviations in Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium on postulated gene-disease associations. Am J Epidemiol. 2006;163:300–9.PubMedCrossRef
135.
Davidoff F, Batalden P, Stevens D, Ogrinc G, Mooney S. SQUIRE Development Group. Publication guidelines for improvement studies in health care: evolution of the SQUIRE project. Ann Intern Med. 2008;149:670–6.PubMed
136.
Steinberg K, Gallagher M. Assessing genotypes in human genome epidemiology studies. In: Khoury MJ, Little J, Burke W, editors. Human genome epidemiology: a scientific foundation for using genetic information to improve health and prevent disease. New York: Oxford University Press; 2004. p. 79–91.
137.
Plagnol V, Cooper JD, Todd JA, Clayton DG. A method to address differential bias in genotyping in large-scale association studies. PLoS Genet. 2007;3:e74.PubMedCrossRef
138.
Winker MA. Race and ethnicity in medical research: requirements meet reality. J Law Med Ethics. 2006;34:520,5,480.CrossRef
139.
Scuteri A, Sanna S, Chen WM, Uda M, Albai G, Strait J, et al. Genome-wide association scan shows genetic variants in the FTO gene are associated with obesity-related traits. PLoS Genet. 2007;3:e115.PubMedCrossRef
140.
Chan AW, Hrobjartsson A, Haahr MT, Gotzsche PC, Altman DG. Empirical evidence for selective reporting of outcomes in randomized trials: comparison of protocols to published articles. JAMA. 2004;291:2457–65.PubMedCrossRef
141.
Chan AW, Krleza-Jeric K, Schmid I, Altman DG. Outcome reporting bias in randomized trials funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. CMAJ. 2004;171:735–40.PubMed
142.
Chan AW, Altman DG. Identifying outcome reporting bias in randomised trials on PubMed: review of publications and survey of authors. BMJ. 2005;330:753.PubMedCrossRef
143.
Contopoulos-Ioannidis DG, Alexiou GA, Gouvias TC, Ioannidis JP. An empirical evaluation of multifarious outcomes in pharmacogenetics: beta-2 adrenoceptor gene polymorphisms in asthma treatment. Pharmacogenet Genomics. 2006;16:705–11.PubMedCrossRef
144.
Wain HM, Bruford EA, Lovering RC, Lush MJ, Wright MW, Povey S. Guidelines for human gene nomenclature. Genomics. 2002;79:464–70.PubMedCrossRef
145.
Wain HM, Lush M, Ducluzeau F, Povey S. Genew: the human gene nomenclature database. Nucleic Acids Res. 2002;30:169–71.PubMedCrossRef
146.
Sherry ST, Ward MH, Kholodov M, Baker J, Phan L, Smigielski EM, et al. dbSNP: the NCBI database of genetic variation. Nucleic Acids Res. 2001;29:308–11.PubMedCrossRef
147.
Antonarakis SE. Recommendations for a nomenclature system for human gene mutations. Nomenclature Working Group. Hum Mutat. 1998;11:1–3.PubMedCrossRef
148.
den Dunnen JT, Antonarakis SE. Mutation nomenclature extensions and suggestions to describe complex mutations: a discussion. Hum Mutat. 2000;15:7–12.CrossRef
149.
Tobin MD, Sheehan NA, Scurrah KJ, Burton PR. Adjusting for treatment effects in studies of quantitative traits: antihypertensive therapy and systolic blood pressure. Stat Med. 2005;24:2911–35.PubMedCrossRef
150.
Lynch M, Ritland K. Estimation of pairwise relatedness with molecular markers. Genetics. 1999;152:1753–66.PubMed
151.
Slager SL, Schaid DJ. Evaluation of candidate genes in case-control studies: a statistical method to account for related subjects. Am J Hum Genet. 2001;68:1457–62.PubMedCrossRef
152.
Voight BF, Pritchard JK. Confounding from cryptic relatedness in case-control association studies. PLoS Genet. 2005;1:e32.PubMedCrossRef
153.
Homer N, Szelinger S, Redman M, Duggan D, Tembe W, Muehling J, et al. Resolving individuals contributing trace amounts of DNA to highly complex mixtures using high-density SNP genotyping microarrays. PLoS Genet. 2008;4:e1000167.PubMedCrossRef
154.
Metadata
Title
Strengthening the reporting of genetic association studies (STREGA): an extension of the STROBE statement
Authors
Julian Little
Julian P. T. Higgins
John P. A. Ioannidis
David Moher
France Gagnon
Erik von Elm
Muin J. Khoury
Barbara Cohen
George Davey-Smith
Jeremy Grimshaw
Paul Scheet
Marta Gwinn
Robin E. Williamson
Guang Yong Zou
Kim Hutchings
Candice Y. Johnson
Valerie Tait
Miriam Wiens
Jean Golding
Cornelia van Duijn
John McLaughlin
Andrew Paterson
George Wells
Isabel Fortier
Matthew Freedman
Maja Zecevic
Richard King
Claire Infante-Rivard
Alex Stewart
Nick Birkett
Publication date
01-01-2009
Publisher
Springer Netherlands
Published in
European Journal of Epidemiology / Issue 1/2009
Print ISSN: 0393-2990
Electronic ISSN: 1573-7284
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10654-008-9302-y

Other articles of this Issue 1/2009

European Journal of Epidemiology 1/2009 Go to the issue

Developmental Epidemiology

The influence of birth weight and body mass in early adulthood on early coronary heart disease risk among Danish men born in 1953

Commentary

STROBE and STREGA: instruments for improving transparency and quality of reporting scientific results

Book Review

Steve Selvin: Survival analysis for epidemiologic and medical research

DEMOGRAPHY

Sex ratio patterns according to Asian ethnicity in Québec, 1981–2004

MORTALITY

Parity-related mortality: shape of association among middle-aged and elderly men and women

Cardiovascular Disease

Subclinical coronary atherosclerosis and neighbourhood deprivation in an urban region