TY - JOUR
T1 - STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association studies (STREGA)
T2 - An extension of the STROBE statement
AU - Little, Julian
AU - Higgins, Julian P.T.
AU - Loannidis, John P.A.
AU - Moher, David
AU - Gagnon, France
AU - Von Elm, Erik
AU - Khoury, Muin J.
AU - Cohen, Barbara
AU - Davey-Smith, George
AU - Grimshaw, Jeremy
AU - Scheet, Paul
AU - Gwinn, Marta
AU - Williamson, Robin E.
AU - Zou, Guang Yong
AU - Hutchings, Kim
AU - Johnson, Candice Y.
AU - Tait, Valerie
AU - Wiens, Miriam
AU - Golding, Jean
AU - Van Duijn, Cornelia
AU - McLaughlin, John
AU - Paterson, Andrew
AU - Wells, George
AU - Fortier, Lsabel
AU - Freedman, Matthew
AU - Zecevic, Maja
AU - King, Richard
AU - Lnfante-Rivard, Claire
AU - Stewart, Alex
AU - Birkett, Nick
PY - 2009/2/3
Y1 - 2009/2/3
N2 - 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 into 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, modeling 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 issues of data volume 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.
AB - 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 into 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, modeling 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 issues of data volume 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.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=58749117148&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=58749117148&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.7326/0003-4819-150-3-200902030-00011
DO - 10.7326/0003-4819-150-3-200902030-00011
M3 - Article
C2 - 19189911
AN - SCOPUS:58749117148
SN - 0003-4819
VL - 150
SP - 206
EP - 215
JO - Annals of internal medicine
JF - Annals of internal medicine
IS - 3
ER -