4.6 Review

STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association studies (STREGA) - an extension of the STROBE statement

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL INVESTIGATION
卷 39, 期 4, 页码 247-266

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2362.2009.02125.x

关键词

Epidemiology; gene-disease associations; gene-environment interaction; genetics; genome-wide association; meta-analysis; reporting recommendations; systematic review

资金

  1. Institutes of Genetics and of Nutrition, Metabolism and Diabetes, Canadian Institutes of Health Research
  2. Genome Canada
  3. Biotechnology, Genomics and Population Health Branch, Public Health Agency of Canada
  4. Affymetrix
  5. DNA Genotek
  6. TrialStat!
  7. GeneSens
  8. Medical Research Council [MC_U105285807] Funding Source: researchfish
  9. MRC [MC_U105285807] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

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, modelling 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.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据