Skip to content
EvidenceHelixEvidenceLib · Scientific Encyclopedia
⌘ K

Scientific library

EvidenceLib encyclopediaAll articles A–Z2,100Open textbooks2Cancer study catalog458How it is made

My workspace this browser

Saved pages0Notes & annotations0

Recently viewed

Explore by field

Cancer and Oncology107Genetics and Genomics95Neuroscience110Cardiovascular Medicine105Immunology90Pharmacology99Molecular Biology100Infectious Diseases102Rare and Inherited Diseases106Clinical Research98Anatomy and Physiology542Drugs and Chemicals546
Plans & pricingCompare EvidenceHelix workspace plans
Library›EvidenceLib›Genetics and Genomics›Lod Score
Explore more with EvidenceHelix Workspace

Compare studies, analyze evidence and create research reports with premium tools.

Explore Researcher plans

Research reading room

Lod Score

Genetics and Genomics · NLM MeSH · updated 2026-10-29 · version 1

Citations verified against PubMedNot yet clinician-reviewed9 referencesApproximately 4 min read

The total relative probability, expressed on a logarithmic scale, that a linkage relationship exists among selected loci.

Table of Contents

1. Definition2. Research landscape3. Reading the evidence4. Open-access studies5. Key reviews6. References7. About this article

Definition and research guide

This page combines a MeSH definition, publication statistics and selected research abstracts. It is a starting point for reading the literature, not a medical textbook or a systematic evidence review.

Content available: 3 complete abstracts (690 words), 9 references. Full article text is not stored or reproduced here; follow the PMID, DOI or PMC links to read the original sources and their access terms.

Definition

The total relative probability, expressed on a logarithmic scale, that a linkage relationship exists among selected loci. Lod is an acronym for logarithmic odds.

Definition: NLM Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) scope note (Public domain (U.S. National Library of Medicine); attribution requested). View the MeSH record.

Also known as: Lod Scores; Score, Lod; Scores, Lod.

Where it fits in the MeSH classification

Broader topics
Genetic Linkage

Research landscape

PubMed indexes 6,144 records tagged with the MeSH heading “Lod Score” (counts retrieved 2026-10-29). 26 of them (0.4%) were published from 2020 onward, and the busiest period so far is 2000-2009 with 2,985 records.

Reviews account for 152 records (2.5%) and meta-analyses for 23. Randomized controlled trials number 9 (0.1%) as a share of all records on the topic. Randomized trials make up only a small share of this literature, so much of what is known comes from laboratory, observational or descriptive work.

PubMed records by publication periodthrough 1999: 2,463 records; 2000-2009: 2,985 records; 2010-2019: 670 records; 2020 onward: 26 records2,463through 19992,9852000-20096702010-2019262020 onward
Records in PubMed indexed with this heading, by publication period. Real counts from NCBI E-utilities; the final period covers only part of the current year. Volume reflects how much has been published, not how strong the evidence is.
Show the data
PeriodRecords
through 19992,463
2000-20092,985
2010-2019670
2020 onward26
Share of records by publication typeReviews: 2.5 percent; Meta-analyses: 0.4 percent; Randomized controlled trials: 0.1 percentReviews2.5% (152)Meta-analyses0.4% (23)Randomized controlled trials0.1% (9)
Share of all PubMed records on this heading that carry each publication type. Types overlap with other records, so the shares do not sum to 100%.
Publication-type chart data
Publication types among 6,144 PubMed records
TypeRecordsShare
Reviews1522.5%
Meta-analyses230.4%
Randomized controlled trials90.1%

Method: PubMed query "Lod Score"[MeSH Terms] with publication-type and date filters, retrieved 2026-10-29.

Reading the evidence in genetics and genomics

Genetic findings vary widely in strength. A variant linked to a condition in one study may not replicate in other ancestries, and most common variants have small effects that are meaningful only in aggregate. Studies of rare, high-impact variants can support strong causal claims about a gene, while association studies describe statistical links that need functional and independent replication. Check the sample size, the ancestry of participants, whether results were replicated, and whether a laboratory or clinical outcome was actually measured.

Evidence from open-access studies

These open-access studies come from PubMed’s best-match results for this heading (papers whose main topic it is), ranked here by citation count, with one recent addition. Each abstract is reproduced in full under its recorded open licence so that you can read the authors’ own words. They illustrate the literature; they are not a systematic summary of it. Citation counts measure attention, not reliability or clinical benefit.

Study comparison — selected abstracts, not a systematic review
Study / authorsYearSource label / designEurope PMC citationsLicence / source
Investigation of parent-of-origin effect in comitant strabismus using MOD score analysis
Shaaban S, Matsuo T, Strauch K, Ohtsuki H
2009Research article
Design not recorded in structured metadata
10cc by
PMID 19597570 · PMC2709426
Allele frequency misspecification: effect on power and Type I error of model-dependent linkage analysis of quantitative traits under random ascertainment
Mandal DM, Sorant AJ, Atwood LD, Wilson AF, Bailey-Wilson JE
2006Research article
Design not recorded in structured metadata
10cc by
PMID 16618369 · DOI · PMC1475629
Linkage analysis in familial non-Lynch syndrome colorectal cancer families from Sweden
Kontham V, von Holst S, Lindblom A
2013Clinical trial
Design not recorded in structured metadata
8cc by
PMID 24349560 · DOI · PMC3859667

Investigation of parent-of-origin effect in comitant strabismus using MOD score analysis [1]

Research article Shaaban S, Matsuo T, Strauch K, Ohtsuki H · · 2009 · cited 10 times (Europe PMC)

Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
Opening excerpt
PurposeComitant strabismus is a common pediatric ophthalmic disorder with both genetic and non-genetic factors contributing to its etiology.
Closing excerpt
ConclusionsThe results suggest that the parent-of-origin effect may play a role in the etiology of comitant strabismus.
Interpretation limits
Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (173 words)

PurposeComitant strabismus is a common pediatric ophthalmic disorder with both genetic and non-genetic factors contributing to its etiology. The aim of the current study is to investigate the phenomenon of a parent-of-origin effect, genomic imprinting, as a possible mode of inheritance in comitant strabismus.MethodsWe performed parametric genome-wide MOD score (model-maximized LOD score) linkage analysis, incorporating imprinting effects, for 382 microsatellite markers in a sample of 258 individuals (117 males and 141 females) from 55 Japanese families with comitant strabismus. We included individuals as affected patients if they presented with comitant esotropia or exotropia based on ophthalmic examination, history taking, or analysis of medical records.ResultsSignificant or suggestive linkage to comitant strabismus with evidence of maternal or paternal imprinting was detected at D4S1575 (4q28.3), D7S486 (7q31.2), D11S1320 (11q24.2), D12S324 (12q24.32), and D19S420 (19q13.11). Using the MOD score approach, we found new evidence of linkage to comitant strabismus at three loci on chromosomes 6q26 (MOD(imp)=MOD(reg)=3.75), 12q24.32 (MOD(imp)=3.36), and 19q13.11 (MOD(imp)=3.79).ConclusionsThe results suggest that the parent-of-origin effect may play a role in the etiology of comitant strabismus.

Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 19597570 · PMC2709426

Allele frequency misspecification: effect on power and Type I error of model-dependent linkage analysis of quantitative traits under random ascertainment [2]

Research article Mandal DM, Sorant AJ, Atwood LD, Wilson AF, Bailey-Wilson JE · · 2006 · cited 10 times (Europe PMC)

Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
Opening excerpt
BackgroundStudies of model-based linkage analysis show that trait or marker model misspecification leads to decreasing power or increasing Type I error rate.
Closing excerpt
Thus, with missing parental genotype data, lod-score linkage is not as robust to misspecification of marker allele frequencies as has been commonly thought.
Interpretation limits
Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (270 words)

BackgroundStudies of model-based linkage analysis show that trait or marker model misspecification leads to decreasing power or increasing Type I error rate. An increase in Type I error rate is seen when marker related parameters (e.g., allele frequencies) are misspecified and ascertainment is through the trait, but lod-score methods are expected to be robust when ascertainment is random (as is often the case in linkage studies of quantitative traits). In previous studies, the power of lod-score linkage analysis using the "correct" generating model for the trait was found to increase when the marker allele frequencies were misspecified and parental data were missing. An investigation of Type I error rates, conducted in the absence of parental genotype data and with misspecification of marker allele frequencies, showed that an inflation in Type I error rate was the cause of at least part of this apparent increased power. To investigate whether the observed inflation in Type I error rate in model-based LOD score linkage was due to sampling variation, the trait model was estimated from each sample using REGCHUNT, an automated segregation analysis program used to fit models by maximum likelihood using many different sets of initial parameter estimates.ResultsThe Type I error rates observed using the trait models generated by REGCHUNT were usually closer to the nominal levels than those obtained when assuming the generating trait model.ConclusionThis suggests that the observed inflation of Type I error upon misspecification of marker allele frequencies is at least partially due to sampling variation. Thus, with missing parental genotype data, lod-score linkage is not as robust to misspecification of marker allele frequencies as has been commonly thought.

Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 16618369 · DOI · PMC1475629

Linkage analysis in familial non-Lynch syndrome colorectal cancer families from Sweden [3]

Clinical trial Kontham V, von Holst S, Lindblom A · · 2013 · cited 8 times (Europe PMC)

Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
Opening excerpt
Family history is a major risk factor for colorectal cancer and many families segregate the disease as a seemingly monogenic trait.
Closing excerpt
Sequencing of genes in the regions will be done in future studies.
Interpretation limits
Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (247 words)

Family history is a major risk factor for colorectal cancer and many families segregate the disease as a seemingly monogenic trait. A minority of familial colorectal cancer could be explained by known monogenic genes and genetic loci. Familial polyposis and Lynch syndrome are two syndromes where the predisposing genes are known but numerous families have been tested without finding the predisposing gene. We performed a genome wide linkage analysis in 121 colorectal families with an increased risk of colorectal cancer. The families were ascertained from the department of clinical genetics at the Karolinska University Hospital in Stockholm, Sweden and were considered negative for Familial Polyposis and Lynch syndrome. In total 600 subjects were genotyped using single nucleotide polymorphism array chips. Parametric- and non-parametric linkage analyses were computed using MERLIN in all and subsets of families. No statistically significant result was seen, however, there were suggestive positive HLODs above two in parametric linkage analysis. This was observed in a recessive model for high-risk families, at locus 9q31.1 (HLOD=2.2, rs1338121) and for moderate-risk families, at locus Xp22.33 (LOD=2.2 and HLOD=2.5, rs2306737). Using families with early-onset, recessive analysis suggested one locus on 4p16.3 (LOD=2.2, rs920683) and one on 17p13.2 (LOD/HLOD=2.0, rs884250). No NPL score above two was seen for any of the families. Our linkage study provided additional support for the previously suggested region on chromosome 9 and suggested additional loci to be involved in colorectal cancer risk. Sequencing of genes in the regions will be done in future studies.

Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 24349560 · DOI · PMC3859667

Key reviews and meta-analyses

The most cited review-type papers among PubMed’s best-match results for this heading, listed with bibliographic details only. Follow the links for the full text and access terms.

  • Research article Factors affecting statistical power in the detection of genetic association [4]
    Gordon D, Finch SJ · J Clin Invest · 2005 · cited 88 times (Europe PMC)
  • Research article Score test for detecting linkage to complex traits in selected samples [5]
    Lebrec J, Putter H, Houwelingen JC · Genet Epidemiol · 2004 · cited 18 times (Europe PMC)
  • Research article On the genetic length of the short arm of the human X chromosome [6]
    Ropers HH, Wieacker P, Wienker TF, Davies K, Williamson R · Hum Genet · 1983 · cited 10 times (Europe PMC)
  • Research article The lod score method [7]
    Rice JP, Saccone NL, Corbett J · Adv Genet · 2001 · cited 7 times (Europe PMC)
  • Research article Major strengths and weaknesses of the lod score method [8]
    Ott J · Adv Genet · 2001 · cited 6 times (Europe PMC)
  • Research article Extension of the lod score: the mod score [9]
    Clerget-Darpoux F · Adv Genet · 2001 · cited 5 times (Europe PMC)

References

  1. Shaaban S, Matsuo T, Strauch K, Ohtsuki H. Investigation of parent-of-origin effect in comitant strabismus using MOD score analysis. . 2009. PMID 19597570 · PMC2709426
  2. Mandal DM, Sorant AJ, Atwood LD, Wilson AF, Bailey-Wilson JE. Allele frequency misspecification: effect on power and Type I error of model-dependent linkage analysis of quantitative traits under random ascertainment. . 2006. PMID 16618369 · DOI · PMC1475629
  3. Kontham V, von Holst S, Lindblom A. Linkage analysis in familial non-Lynch syndrome colorectal cancer families from Sweden. . 2013. PMID 24349560 · DOI · PMC3859667
  4. Gordon D, Finch SJ. Factors affecting statistical power in the detection of genetic association. J Clin Invest. 2005. PMID 15931375 · DOI · PMC1137002
  5. Lebrec J, Putter H, Houwelingen JC. Score test for detecting linkage to complex traits in selected samples. Genet Epidemiol. 2004. PMID 15305326 · DOI
  6. Ropers HH, Wieacker P, Wienker TF, Davies K, Williamson R. On the genetic length of the short arm of the human X chromosome. Hum Genet. 1983. PMID 6315564 · DOI
  7. Rice JP, Saccone NL, Corbett J. The lod score method. Adv Genet. 2001. PMID 11037316 · DOI
  8. Ott J. Major strengths and weaknesses of the lod score method. Adv Genet. 2001. PMID 11037318 · DOI
  9. Clerget-Darpoux F. Extension of the lod score: the mod score. Adv Genet. 2001. PMID 11037317 · DOI

About this article

Sources
NLM Medical Subject Headings (definition, synonyms); NCBI PubMed (counts, identifiers); Europe PMC (open-access abstracts and citation counts).
Verification
Every reference was resolved against PubMed on 2026-10-31; title, year and DOI matched.
Review state
automated source verified; no human expert review has been recorded yet.
Version
1, last updated 2026-10-29.

See how EvidenceLib is built. Spotted an error? Email support@evidencehelix.com.

Evidence strength

EvidenceHelix's computed view of the study designs behind this topic: how common meta-analyses, randomized trials and reviews are, how recent the literature is, and a plain-language reading. It describes the design mix of the literature. It is not a quality appraisal of any study, and it is not medical advice.

Included with the Researcher plan

Reading every article stays free. This computed view is part of the paid plans.

See plans Sign in

Your notes

Notes and highlights stay in this browser only; they are not sent to EvidenceHelix.

Related research topics

  • Genetic Risk ScoreGenetics and Genomics
  • Injury Severity ScoreClinical Research
  • Risk FactorsClinical Research
  • Early Warning ScoreClinical Research
  • 3' Untranslated RegionsGenetics and Genomics
  • AllelesGenetics and Genomics

All 95 articles in Genetics and Genomics →

At a glance

6,144
PubMed records on this heading
0%
published since 2020
152
review articles
9
randomized trials
9
verified references below

Counts come from PubMed on 2026-10-29; they show how much has been written, not how strong the evidence is.

Related topics See all →

  • Genetic Risk ScoreGenetics and Genomics
  • Injury Severity ScoreClinical Research
  • Risk FactorsClinical Research
  • Early Warning ScoreClinical Research
  • 3' Untranslated RegionsGenetics and Genomics

My notes & annotations (0)

Nothing yet. Select text and press Highlight, or write a note in the Notes tab. Stored in this browser only.

Sources

  • NLM MeSH record ↗
  • PubMed search used ↗

EvidenceLib is a research-education resource, not medical advice. It does not diagnose, prescribe or recommend starting, stopping or changing any treatment. Talk to a qualified clinician about your own situation. Methods, sources and licences · Legal · Support