Table 3. Parent-of-origin analysis of the combined FLG mutations.
| Children Genotype model (CG) | ||||||
| Study | R1 (CI) | R2 (CI) | S1 (CI) | Im (CI) | P null a | - |
| Central Europe | 3.10 (2.68–3.59) | 10.5 (7.20–15.36) | - | - | 5.9 x 10−74 | - |
| Northern Europe | 2.44 (1.95–3.06) | 7.37 (3.37–15.81) | - | - | 9.23 x 10−17 | - |
| Meta-analysis P meta c | 2.89 (2.56–3.27) 2.8 x 10−65 | 9.80 (6.97–13.77)2.1 x 10−39 | - | - | - | - |
| P het d | 0.08 | 0.41 | ||||
| Maternal Child Genotype model (MCG) | ||||||
| Study | R1 (CI) | R2 (CI) | S1 (CI) | Im (CI) | P null a | P MCG vs CG b |
| Central Europe | 2.57 (2.18–3.04) | 7.97 (5.36–11.87) | 1.55 (1.29–1.87) | - | 2.7 x 10−77 | 5.0 x 10−6 |
| Northern Europe | 2.13 (1.67–2.72) | 5.89 (2.67–12.97) | 1.42 (1.11–1.82) | - | 1.42 x 10−17 | 0.005 |
| Meta-analysis P meta c | 2.43 (2.11–2.78) 1.0 x 10−36 | 7.50 (5.26–10.70) 1.2 x 10−28 | 1.50 (1.29–1.74) 8.4 x 10−8 | - | - | - |
| P het d | 0.21 | 0.50 | 0.58 | |||
| Imprinting model (Im) | ||||||
| Study | R1 (CI) | R2 (CI) | S1 (CI) | Im (CI) | P null a | P Im vs CG b |
| Central Europe | 2.70 (2.19–3.31) | 8.06 (5.09–12.78) | - | 1.30 (1.00–1.69) | 1.2 x 10−73 | 0.047 |
| Northern Europe | 2.19 (1.63–2.95) | 5.97 (2.56–13.92) | - | 1.23 (0.86–1.75) | 3.22 x 10−16 | 0.25 |
| Meta-analysis P meta c | 2.52 (2.13–2.99) 1.4 x 10−26 | 7.53 (5.02–11.28) 1.4 x 10−22 | - | 1.28 (1.03–1.57) 0.02 | - | - |
| P het d | 0.26 | 0.54 | 0.80 | |||
a P value for the comparison of each model versus the null model with no effects.
b P value for the comparison of each model versus the Child Genotype model.
c P value for the meta-analysis of each estimated parameter (see methods). CI indicates 95% confidence interval.
d P value for a test of heterogeneity. All results correspond to the combined FLG mutations.