Table 2.
Authors | Category of preterm birth | Sample size | Limitation | Concerns |
---|---|---|---|---|
Zhang et al., 2015 | <34 weeks gestation (spontaneous onset of labor) |
1,851 (916 cases) |
Small sample size | Reduces power |
Inclusion of highly heterogeneous groups (in terms of ancestry) | Further reduces power | |||
Lack of stringent control for background ancestry | Increases false‐positive rate | |||
Lack of support from markers in the same chromosomal regions | Increases probability of genotyping errors | |||
Failure of replication in independent samples | Suggests unreliable results | |||
Rapport et al. 2018 |
Birth between 25 and 30 weeks gestation (spontaneous onset of labor) |
13,944 (1,349 cases) split into five ancestral groups EUR 9,890 (260 cases) AFR 1874 (190 cases) AMR 1847 (745 cases) EAS 249 (131 cases) SAS 59 (23 cases) |
Each association was only observed in one of the five samples | |
Unable to obtain replication in any external samples | Suggests unreliable results | |||
Samples from which the associations were seen were small (AFR N preterm = 190, AMR N preterm = 745) | Reduces power | |||
Each subsample was genetically heterogeneous, controlling for ancestry challenging | Further reduces power | |||
Cases and controls were taken from different populations | Possible genotyping batch effects |