Skip Navigation


IJE Advance Access originally published online on January 19, 2006
International Journal of Epidemiology 2006 35(2):488-490; doi:10.1093/ije/dyi294
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Supplementary Data
Right arrow Supplementary Data
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
35/2/488    most recent
dyi294v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by SUNG, J.
Right arrow Articles by KIMM, K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by SUNG, J.
Right arrow Articles by KIMM, K.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the International Epidemiological Association © The Author 2006; all rights reserved.

Letters to the Editor

Do we need more twin studies? The Healthy Twin Study, Korea

JOOHON SUNG1,*, SUNG-IL CHO2, YUN-MI SONG3, KAYOUNG LEE4, EUN-YOUNG CHOI5, MINA HA6, JIHAE KIM7, HO KIM2, YEONJU KIM8, EUN-KYUNG SHIN2, YOON-HEE KIM2, KEUN-YOUNG YOO8, CHAN PARK9 and KUCHAN KIMM9

1 Department of Preventive Medicine, Kangwon National University College of Medicine, Korea
2 Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea
3 Department of Family Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, SungKyunKwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
4 Department of Family Medicine, Inje University College of Medicine, Korea
5 Department of Family Medicine, Dankook University College of Medicine, Korea
6 Department of Preventive Medicine, Dankook University College of Medicine, Korea
7 Department of Psychiatrics, Samsung Medical Center, SungKyunKwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
8 Department of Preventive Medicine, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
9 National Genomic Research Institute, National Institute of Health, Korea

* Corresponding author. Department of Preventive Medicine, Kangwon National University College of Medicine, Hyoja-2-Dong, Chunchon, Kangwon-Do, Korea. E-mail: sungjohn@kangwon.ac.kr

The first 10% of the full text of this article appears below.

The success of the Human Genome Project and recent technological progress have made the analysis of individual genetic variation much more feasible. However, genetic variations responsible for common complex human diseases and traits are largely unknown, with a few exceptions of specific subtype of common diseases (e.g. early onset type diabetes or Alzheimer disease).1 Twin study has evolved from the classical twin study design, in which comparison of concordance in traits or diseases between monozygotic and dizygotic twins provided evidence about the genetic and environmental contributions to the phenotypes/diseases of interest.2 Current twin studies in Europe, Australia, and other countries are already comprehensive genomic studies rather than a classical twin design, which maximize the presence of twins. Examples of innovation include: linkage study using dizygotic twin pairs; linkage and association study using the family of twins; epigenetic . . . [Full Text of this Article]

Twin studies in low-income and middle-income countries

Advantages of twin, family, population designs

Epigenetic and environmental causes and the Healthy Twin Study

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?