Cargando…

A comparison of multiple testing adjustment methods with block-correlation positively-dependent tests

In high dimensional data analysis (such as gene expression, spatial epidemiology, or brain imaging studies), we often test thousands or more hypotheses simultaneously. As the number of tests increases, the chance of observing some statistically significant tests is very high even when all null hypot...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Stevens, John R., Al Masud, Abdullah, Suyundikov, Anvar
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5409054/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28453517
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0176124
_version_ 1783232411304198144
author Stevens, John R.
Al Masud, Abdullah
Suyundikov, Anvar
author_facet Stevens, John R.
Al Masud, Abdullah
Suyundikov, Anvar
author_sort Stevens, John R.
collection PubMed
description In high dimensional data analysis (such as gene expression, spatial epidemiology, or brain imaging studies), we often test thousands or more hypotheses simultaneously. As the number of tests increases, the chance of observing some statistically significant tests is very high even when all null hypotheses are true. Consequently, we could reach incorrect conclusions regarding the hypotheses. Researchers frequently use multiplicity adjustment methods to control type I error rates—primarily the family-wise error rate (FWER) or the false discovery rate (FDR)—while still desiring high statistical power. In practice, such studies may have dependent test statistics (or p-values) as tests can be dependent on each other. However, some commonly-used multiplicity adjustment methods assume independent tests. We perform a simulation study comparing several of the most common adjustment methods involved in multiple hypothesis testing, under varying degrees of block-correlation positive dependence among tests.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5409054
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-54090542017-05-12 A comparison of multiple testing adjustment methods with block-correlation positively-dependent tests Stevens, John R. Al Masud, Abdullah Suyundikov, Anvar PLoS One Research Article In high dimensional data analysis (such as gene expression, spatial epidemiology, or brain imaging studies), we often test thousands or more hypotheses simultaneously. As the number of tests increases, the chance of observing some statistically significant tests is very high even when all null hypotheses are true. Consequently, we could reach incorrect conclusions regarding the hypotheses. Researchers frequently use multiplicity adjustment methods to control type I error rates—primarily the family-wise error rate (FWER) or the false discovery rate (FDR)—while still desiring high statistical power. In practice, such studies may have dependent test statistics (or p-values) as tests can be dependent on each other. However, some commonly-used multiplicity adjustment methods assume independent tests. We perform a simulation study comparing several of the most common adjustment methods involved in multiple hypothesis testing, under varying degrees of block-correlation positive dependence among tests. Public Library of Science 2017-04-28 /pmc/articles/PMC5409054/ /pubmed/28453517 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0176124 Text en © 2017 Stevens et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Stevens, John R.
Al Masud, Abdullah
Suyundikov, Anvar
A comparison of multiple testing adjustment methods with block-correlation positively-dependent tests
title A comparison of multiple testing adjustment methods with block-correlation positively-dependent tests
title_full A comparison of multiple testing adjustment methods with block-correlation positively-dependent tests
title_fullStr A comparison of multiple testing adjustment methods with block-correlation positively-dependent tests
title_full_unstemmed A comparison of multiple testing adjustment methods with block-correlation positively-dependent tests
title_short A comparison of multiple testing adjustment methods with block-correlation positively-dependent tests
title_sort comparison of multiple testing adjustment methods with block-correlation positively-dependent tests
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5409054/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28453517
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0176124
work_keys_str_mv AT stevensjohnr acomparisonofmultipletestingadjustmentmethodswithblockcorrelationpositivelydependenttests
AT almasudabdullah acomparisonofmultipletestingadjustmentmethodswithblockcorrelationpositivelydependenttests
AT suyundikovanvar acomparisonofmultipletestingadjustmentmethodswithblockcorrelationpositivelydependenttests
AT stevensjohnr comparisonofmultipletestingadjustmentmethodswithblockcorrelationpositivelydependenttests
AT almasudabdullah comparisonofmultipletestingadjustmentmethodswithblockcorrelationpositivelydependenttests
AT suyundikovanvar comparisonofmultipletestingadjustmentmethodswithblockcorrelationpositivelydependenttests