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...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
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 |