Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2009 Sep 10.
Published in final edited form as: Ann Hum Genet. 2009 Jun 1;73(Pt 4):456–464. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-1809.2009.00527.x

Table 2.

Power comparison under the scenario that both phenotypes are associated with the causal locus.

Residual Correlation Window-Size = 1 Window-Size = 3 Window-Size = 5



UHTR PCHTR BHTR UHTR PCHTR BHTR UHTR PCHTR BHTR
0.90 31.0 35.3 25.5 42.7 48.1 35.1 55.1 58.4 47.7
0.60 38.2 42.2 31.8 37.9 50.0 43.2 54.5 57.6 49.2
0.30 37.3 50.5 37.6 51.9 63.2 51.4 63.7 73.2 62.0
0.00 38.8 41.9 51.7 59.7 55.3 66.5 73.3 67.6 76.4
−0.30 38.9 5.0 70.1 53.8 3.9 86.1 66.0 4.0 92.3
−0.60 39.6 4.7 97.2 54.9 4.3 99.5 64.5 3.9 99.9
−0.90 41.1 4.1 100.0 54.7 3.9 100.0 65.1 4.4 100.0

Note: 1000 individuals were simulated under each parameter setting. Power was estimated based on 5000 replications. ‘UHTR’ denotes the univariate haplotype trend regression testing, ‘PCHTR’ denotes the principle component based univariate haplotype trend regression testing and ‘BHTR’ denotes the bivatiate haplotype trend regression testing.