Strengthening the reporting of Genetic RIsk Prediction Studies: the GRIPS Statement

Department of Epidemiology, Erasmus University Medical Center, PO Box 2040, Rotterdam 3000 CA, The Netherlands. .
Genome Medicine (Impact Factor: 5.34). 03/2011; 3(3):16. DOI: 10.1186/gm230
Source: PubMed


The rapid and continuing progress in gene discovery for complex diseases is fueling interest in the potential application of genetic risk models for clinical and public health practice. The number of studies assessing the predictive ability is steadily increasing, but the quality and completeness of reporting varies. A multidisciplinary workshop sponsored by the Human Genome Epidemiology Network developed a checklist of 25 items recommended for strengthening the reporting of genetic risk prediction studies (the GRIPS statement), building on the principles established by prior reporting guidelines. These recommendations aim to enhance the transparency of study reporting, and thereby to improve the synthesis and application of information from multiple studies that might differ in design, conduct, or analysis. A detailed Explanation and Elaboration document is published at

Download full-text


Available from: Muin J Khoury,
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The Random Forests (RF) algorithm has become a commonly used machine learning algorithm for genetic association studies. It is well suited for genetic applications since it is both computationally efficient and models genetic causal mechanisms well. With its growing ubiquity, there has been inconsistent and less than optimal use of RF in the literature. The purpose of this review is to breakdown the theoretical and statistical basis of RF so that practitioners are able to apply it in their work. An emphasis is placed on showing how the various components contribute to bias and variance, as well as discussing variable importance measures. Applications specific to genetic studies are highlighted. To provide context, RF is compared to other commonly used machine learning algorithms.
    Statistical Applications in Genetics and Molecular Biology 01/2011; 10(1):32-32. DOI:10.2202/1544-6115.1691 · 1.13 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Genetic studies of rheumatic disease require a rigorous framework for assessing statistical significance. Here, we provide guidelines for reporting methods and results, especially for studies pertaining to discovery and replication of genetic variants associated with rheumatic diseases.
    Arthritis & Rheumatology 10/2011; 63(10):2839-47. DOI:10.1002/art.30509 · 7.76 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: High von Willebrand factor (VWF) plasma levels are associated with an increased risk of stroke. VWF levels are strongly heritable. A previous meta-analysis of five large genome-wide association studies identified single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) within eight genetic loci as determinants of VWF levels. Whether these SNPs are associated with stroke risk is not known. The aim of our study was to investigate the association between genetic determinants of VWF levels and stroke risk. The study was part of the Rotterdam Study, a large population-based cohort study among subjects aged ≥ 55 years. A total of 5763 participants for whom DNA was available, and who were free of stroke at baseline, were eligible for analysis. VWF antigen (VWF:Ag) levels were measured in 3379 eligible participants. Within each of the eight loci, one top SNP was defined. The association between the eight SNPs and the risk of stroke was analyzed. Then, a genetic score, based on these eight SNPs, was constructed, and its total contribution to VWF plasma levels and stroke risk was investigated. None of the eight SNPs was individually associated with stroke risk. A higher genetic score was significantly associated with a higher VWF:Ag level, but was not associated with an increased risk of stroke. Eight SNPs that strongly determine VWF levels are not associated with stroke risk, either individually, or combined in a genetic score.
    Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis 01/2012; 10(4):550-6. DOI:10.1111/j.1538-7836.2012.04634.x · 5.72 Impact Factor
Show more