Consistency of genome-wide associations across major ancestral groups.

It is not well known whether genetic markers identified through genome-wide association studies (GWAS) confer similar or different risks across people of different ancestry. We screened a regularly updated catalog of all published GWAS curated at the NHGRI website for GWAS-identified associations that had reached genome-wide significance (p ≤ 5 × 10(-8)) in at least one major ancestry group (European, Asian, African) and for which replication data were available for comparison in at least two different major ancestry groups. These groups were compared for the correlation between and differences in risk allele frequencies and genetic effects' estimates.

Use of reclassification for assessment of improved prediction: an empirical evaluation.

Background: An increasing number of studies evaluate the ability of predictors to change risk stratification and alter medical decisions, i.e. reclassification performance.

Assessment of claims of improved prediction beyond the Framingham risk score.

Context: With heightened interest in predictive medicine, many studies try to document information that can improve prediction of major clinical outcomes.

Objective: To evaluate the reported design and analysis of studies that examined whether additional predictors improve predictive performance when added to the Framingham risk score (FRS), one of the most widely validated and cited clinical prediction scores.

Study Selection: Two independent investigators searched 1908 articles citing the article that described the FRS in 1998 until September 2009 through the ISI Web of Knowledge database.

The elderly were under-represented in osteoarthritis clinical trials.

Objectives: Osteoarthritis is the most common disease affecting joints in the elderly. We aimed to evaluate if elderly patients are properly represented in clinical trials of diverse osteoarthritis interventions.

Study Design And Setting: Clinical trials of osteoarthritis interventions were retrieved from Cochrane Library systematic reviews (2006, issue 2).

International ranking systems for universities and institutions: a critical appraisal.

Background: Ranking of universities and institutions has attracted wide attention recently. Several systems have been proposed that attempt to rank academic institutions worldwide.

Methods: We review the two most publicly visible ranking systems, the Shanghai Jiao Tong University 'Academic Ranking of World Universities' and the Times Higher Education Supplement 'World University Rankings' and also briefly review other ranking systems that use different criteria.

Selection in reported epidemiological risks: an empirical assessment.

Background: Epidemiological studies may be subject to selective reporting, but empirical evidence thereof is limited. We empirically evaluated the extent of selection of significant results and large effect sizes in a large sample of recent articles.

Methods And Findings: We evaluated 389 articles of epidemiological studies that reported, in their respective abstracts, at least one relative risk for a continuous risk factor in contrasts based on median, tertile, quartile, or quintile categorizations.