A disanalogy with RCTs and its implications for second-generation causal knowledge

We are less optimistic than Madole & Harden that family-based genome-wide association studies (GWASs) will lead to significant second-generation causal knowledge. Despite bearing some similarities, family-based GWASs and randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are not identical. Most RCTs assess a r...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inThe Behavioral and brain sciences Vol. 46; p. e194
Main Authors Lynch, Kate E., Brown, Rachael L., Strasser, Jeremy, Yeo, Shang Long
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published New York, USA Cambridge University Press 11.09.2023
Subjects
Genes
Genome-wide association studies
Genomes
Ingredients
Open Peer Commentary
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:We are less optimistic than Madole & Harden that family-based genome-wide association studies (GWASs) will lead to significant second-generation causal knowledge. Despite bearing some similarities, family-based GWASs and randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are not identical. Most RCTs assess a relatively homogenous causal stimulus as a treatment, whereas GWASs assess highly heterogeneous causal stimuli. Thus, GWAS results will not translate so easily into second-generation causal knowledge.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
ObjectType-Commentary-3
content type line 23
ISSN:0140-525X
1469-1825
DOI:10.1017/S0140525X22002242