Correcting for Ascertainment

Part of the Methods in Molecular Biology book series (MIMB, volume 1666)


Data used to study human genetics are often not obtained by simple random sampling, which is assumed by many statistical methods, especially those that are based on likelihood for making inferences. There is a well-developed theory to correct likelihoods based on sibship data whether or not the exact mode of ascertainment is known. In the case of larger pedigrees, however, the problem is much more difficult unless they are recruited into the sample by single ascertainment. There is no one piece of software that analyzes ascertainment in general, so most of this chapter is devoted to theory. A general method by which one general genetic analysis software package corrects pedigree data for ascertainment is briefly described.

Key words

Proband Catchment area Proband sampling frame Complete ascertainment Single ascertainment Multiple ascertainment Sequential sampling Proband-dependent sampling Pseudo-likelihood 


  1. 1.
    Weinberg W (1912) Further contributions to the theory of heredity. Part 4. On methods and sources of error in studies of Mendelian ratios in man. Arch für Rassen und Gesellschaftsbiologie 9:165–174Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Weinberg W (1912) Further contributions to the theory of heredity. Part 5. On the inheritance of the predisposition to blood disease with methodological supplements to my sibship method. Arch für Rassen und Gesellschaftsbiologie 9:694–709Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Weinberg W (1927) Mathematical foundations of the proband method. Z für Indukt Abstamm and Vererbungslehre 48:179–228Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ginsburg E, Malkin I, Elston RC (2006) Theoretical aspects of pedigree analysis. Tel Aviv, RamotGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Elston RC, Sobel E (1979) Sampling considerations in the gathering and analysis of pedigree data. Am J Hum Genet 31:62–69PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bailey NTJ (1951) The estimation of the frequencies of recessives with incomplete multiple ascertainment. Ann Eugen 16:215–222CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Li CC, Mantel N (1968) A simple method for estimating the segregation ratio under complete ascertainment. Am J Hum Genet 20:61–81PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fisher RA (1934) The effect of methods of ascertainment upon the estimation of frequencies. Ann Hum Genet 6:13–25Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Haldane JBS (1938) The estimation of the frequencies of recessive conditions in man. Ann Hum Genet 8:255–262Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Stene J (1977) Assumptions for different ascertainment models in human genetics. Biometrics 33:523–527CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ewens WJ, Shute NCE (1986) A resolution of the ascertainment sampling scheme. I. Theory. Theor Popul Biol 30:388–412CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    George VT, Elston RC (1991) An overview of the classical segregation analysis model for independent sibships. Biom J  33:741–753Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ewens WJ (1991) Ascertainment biases and their resolution in biological surveys. In: Rao CR, Chakraborty R (eds) Handbook of statistics. Elsevier North-Holland, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cannings CC, Thompson EA (1977) Ascertainment in the sequential sampling of pedigrees. Clin Genet 12:208–212CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Vieland VJ, Hodge SE (1995) Inherent intractability of the ascertainment problem for pedigree data: a general likelihood framework. Am J Hum Genet 56:33–43PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hodge SE, Vieland VJ (1996) The essence of single ascertainment. Genetics 144:1215–1223PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rabinowitz D (1997) A pseudo-likelihood approach to correcting for ascertainment in family studies. Am J Hum Genet 59:726–730Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Vieland VJ, Hodge SE (1996) The problem of ascertainment for linkage analysis. Am J Hum Genet 58:1072–1084PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Slager SL, Vieland VJ (1997) Investigating the numerical effects of ascertainment bias in linkage analysis: development of methods and preliminary results. Genet Epidemiol 14:1119–1124CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sun X et al (2012) A variable age of onset segregation model for linkage analysis, with correction for ascertainment, applied to glioma. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 21:2242–2251Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    S.A.G.E. 6.4 (2016). Statistical Analysis for Genetic Epidemiology:

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media LLC 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of BiologyUniversity of PennsylvaniaPhiladelphiaUSA
  2. 2.Case Western Reserve UniversityClevelandUSA

Personalised recommendations