Abstract
Aim: Population stratification is a confounding factor in genetic association studies. Self-report measures, the most common method of collecting ethnicity, may be less reliable for psychiatric patients. This study aims to validate our research ethnicity questionnaire as a reliable measure of genetic ancestry. Methods: The validity of our questionnaire was compared with genetic ancestry according to structured association tests and dimensional reduction methods. Our research tool was also compared with a standard multiple choice questionnaire. Results: Our research questionnaire was highly consistent with genetic ancestry. The standard questionnaire demonstrated a greater degree of inconsistency in identifying ethnicity. Conclusion: Collecting information on the geographical ancestry of each individual's grandparents provides a more comprehensive view of ethnicity to prevent population stratification and wasted finances on genotyping.
References
- 1 . Population stratification in epidemiologic studies of common genetic variants and cancer: quantification of bias. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 92(14), 1151–1158 (2000).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar
- 2 Assessing the impact of population stratification on genetic association studies. Nat. Gen. 36(4), 388–393 (2004).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar
- 3 . Counterpoint: bias from population stratification is not a major threat to the validity of conclusions from epidemiological studies of common polymorphisms and cancer. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev. 11, 513–520 (2002).Medline, Google Scholar
- 4 . Data quality control in genetic case–control association studies. Nat. Protoc. 5(9), 1564–1573 (2010).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar
- 5 . Correcting population stratification in genetic association studies using a phylogenetic approach. Bioinformatics 26(6), 798–806 (2010).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar
- 6 Correction of population stratification in large multiethnic association studies. PLoS ONE 1, e1382 (2008).Crossref, Google Scholar
- 7 . Inference of population structure using multilocus genotype data. Genetics 155, 945–959 (2000).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar
- 8 . Use of unlinked genetic markers to detect population stratification in association studies. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 65, 220–228 (1999).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar
- 9 . Accounting for ancestry: population substructure and genome-wide association studies. Hum. Mol. Genet. 17, R143–R150 (2008).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar
- 10 . Improved correction for population stratification in genome-wide association studies by identifying hidden population structures. Genet. Epid. 32, 215–226 (2008).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar
- 11 The International HapMap Consortium. A second generation human haplotype map of over 3.1 million SNPs. Nature 449, 851–861 (2007).Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
- 12 PLINK: a toolset for whole-genome association and population-based linkage analysis. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 81(3), 559–575 (2007).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar
- 13 . Principal components analysis corrects for stratification in genome-wide association studies. Nat. Genet. 38(8), 904–909 (2006).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar
- 14 . Logistic regression protects against population structure in genetic association studies. Genome Res. 16, 290–296 (2006).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar
- 15 GWAS Identifies novel susceptibility loci on 6p21.32 and 21q21.3 for hepatocellular carcinoma in chronic hepatitis B virus carriers. PLoS Genet. 8(7), e1002791 (2012). Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar
