Abstract
We propose a fundamental new definition of single ascertainment, namely, that single ascertainment is any ascertainment scheme in which P[pedigree is ascertained|true structure of pedigree] & p(θ), where p(θ) is some function of genetic parameters θ but is not a function of pedigree structure. Stated in words: Under single ascertainment, all pedigrees have equal (or proportional with respect to genetic parameters) probabilities of being ascertained, independent of pedigree size or structure. This new definition of single ascertainment allows us to show several results: (1) The correct likelihood consists of the probability of the data conditioned on the observed pedigree, divided by the function p(θ), whether sampling is ``proband-independent'' or ``proband-dependent.'' (2) More-familiar definitions of single ascertainment all represent special cases of our definition. (3) When p(θ) represents the prevalence of the trait being studied, our definition corresponds to ``classical'' single ascertainment, i.e., ascertainment through a single ``proband.'' However, the concept of p(θ) can also be generalized to represent the population frequency of configurations of affected relatives (such as affected sib pairs); we call this ``generalized single ascertainment.''
Full Text
The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (906.9 KB).
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Cannings C., Thompson E. A. Ascertainment in the sequential sampling of pedigrees. Clin Genet. 1977 Oct;12(4):208–212. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-0004.1977.tb00928.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Elston R. C. 'Twixt cup and lip: how intractable is the ascertainment problem? Am J Hum Genet. 1995 Jan;56(1):15–17. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Elston R. C., Sobel E. Sampling considerations in the gathering and analysis of pedigree data. Am J Hum Genet. 1979 Jan;31(1):62–69. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Ewens W. J., Green R. M. A resolution of the ascertainment sampling problem: IV. Continuous phenotypes. Genet Epidemiol. 1988;5(6):433–444. doi: 10.1002/gepi.1370050607. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Ewens W. J., Shute N. C. The limits of ascertainment. Ann Hum Genet. 1986 Oct;50(Pt 4):399–402. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-1809.1986.tb01760.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Greenberg D. A. The effect of proband designation on segregation analysis. Am J Hum Genet. 1986 Sep;39(3):329–339. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Hum D. W., MacKenzie R. E. Expression of active domains of a human folate-dependent trifunctional enzyme in Escherichia coli. Protein Eng. 1991 Apr;4(4):493–500. doi: 10.1093/protein/4.4.493. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- MORTON N. E. Genetic tests under incomplete ascertainment. Am J Hum Genet. 1959 Mar;11(1):1–16. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Stene J. Choice of ascertainment model II. Discrimination between multi-proband models by means of birth order data. Ann Hum Genet. 1979 May;42(4):493–505. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-1809.1979.tb00682.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Thompson E. A., Cannings C. Sampling schemes and ascertainment. Prog Clin Biol Res. 1979;32:363–382. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Vieland V. J., Hodge S. E. Inherent intractability of the ascertainment problem for pedigree data: a general likelihood framework. Am J Hum Genet. 1995 Jan;56(1):33–43. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Vieland V. J., Hodge S. E. The problem of ascertainment for linkage analysis. Am J Hum Genet. 1996 May;58(5):1072–1084. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Williams J. S., Stene J. Assumptions for different ascertainment models in human genetics. Biometrics. 1977 Sep;33(3):523–527. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]