Correction for Thomas et al., 2004, Genet. Epidemiol. 26:116–124

1
Erratum Correction for Thomas et al., 2004, Genet. Epidemiol. 26:116–124. In the paper by Thomas et al., 2004, Power of Direct vs Indirect Haplotyping in Association Studies, the following correction should be noted. In the abstract it is incorrectly stated that the relative power of haplotyping over genotyping in association studies increases with decreasing numbers of marker loci. It should state that relative power increases with increasing numbers of marker loci, which is the conclusion drawn within the main text. The authors would like to thank Elizabeth Gillanders for noticing this error. Correspondence to: Peter Visscher, Institute of Cell, Animal and Population Biology, University of Edinburgh, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JT, UK. E-mail: [email protected] Published online 5 August 2005 in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com) DOI: 10.1002/gepi.20083 Genetic Epidemiology 29: 171 (2005) & 2005 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Transcript of Correction for Thomas et al., 2004, Genet. Epidemiol. 26:116–124

Erratum

Correction for Thomas et al., 2004, Genet. Epidemiol. 26:116–124.

In the paper by Thomas et al., 2004, Power of Direct vs Indirect Haplotyping in Association Studies, thefollowing correction should be noted. In the abstract it is incorrectly stated that the relative power ofhaplotyping over genotyping in association studies increases with decreasing numbers of marker loci. Itshould state that relative power increases with increasing numbers of marker loci, which is the conclusiondrawn within the main text.

The authors would like to thank Elizabeth Gillanders for noticing this error.

Correspondence to: Peter Visscher, Institute of Cell, Animal and Population Biology, University of Edinburgh, West Mains Road,Edinburgh EH9 3JT, UK. E-mail: [email protected] online 5 August 2005 in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com)DOI: 10.1002/gepi.20083

Genetic Epidemiology 29: 171 (2005)

& 2005 Wiley-Liss, Inc.