Literature DB >> 17715492

Exploring the information in p-values for the analysis and planning of multiple-test experiments.

David Ruppert1, Dan Nettleton, J T Gene Hwang.   

Abstract

A new methodology is proposed for estimating the proportion of true null hypotheses in a large collection of tests. Each test concerns a single parameter delta whose value is specified by the null hypothesis. We combine a parametric model for the conditional cumulative distribution function (CDF) of the p-value given delta with a nonparametric spline model for the density g(delta) of delta under the alternative hypothesis. The proportion of true null hypotheses and the coefficients in the spline model are estimated by penalized least squares subject to constraints that guarantee that the spline is a density. The estimator is computed efficiently using quadratic programming. Our methodology produces an estimate g(delta) of the density of delta when the null is false and can address such questions as "when the null is false, is the parameter usually close to the null or far away?" This leads us to define a falsely interesting discovery rate (FIDR), a generalization of the false discovery rate. We contrast the FIDR approach to Efron's (2004, Journal of the American Statistical Association 99, 96-104) empirical null hypothesis technique. We discuss the use of g in sample size calculations based on the expected discovery rate (EDR). Our recommended estimator of the proportion of true nulls has less bias compared to estimators based upon the marginal density of the p-values at 1. In a simulation study, we compare our estimators to the convex, decreasing estimator of Langaas, Lindqvist, and Ferkingstad (2005, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B 67, 555-572). The most biased of our estimators is very similar in performance to the convex, decreasing estimator. As an illustration, we analyze differences in gene expression between resistant and susceptible strains of barley.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17715492     DOI: 10.1111/j.1541-0420.2006.00704.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biometrics        ISSN: 0006-341X            Impact factor:   2.571


  14 in total

1.  Global hypothesis testing for high-dimensional repeated measures outcomes.

Authors:  Yueh-Yun Chi; Matthew Gribbin; Yvonne Lamers; Jesse F Gregory; Keith E Muller
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2011-12-09       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  Comments on the analysis of unbalanced microarray data.

Authors:  Kathleen F Kerr
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2009-06-15       Impact factor: 6.937

3.  Exact calculations of average power for the Benjamini-Hochberg procedure.

Authors:  Deborah H Glueck; Jan Mandel; Anis Karimpour-Fard; Lawrence Hunter; Keith E Muller
Journal:  Int J Biostat       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 0.968

4.  Randomised P-values and nonparametric procedures in multiple testing.

Authors:  Joshua D Habiger; Edsel A Peña
Journal:  J Nonparametr Stat       Date:  2011       Impact factor: 1.231

5.  Bias and variance reduction in estimating the proportion of true-null hypotheses.

Authors:  Yebin Cheng; Dexiang Gao; Tiejun Tong
Journal:  Biostatistics       Date:  2014-06-23       Impact factor: 5.899

6.  Deconvolution estimation of mixture distributions with boundaries.

Authors:  Mihee Lee; Peter Hall; Haipeng Shen; J S Marron; Jon Tolle; Christina Burch
Journal:  Electron J Stat       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 1.125

7.  CALCULATING AVERAGE POWER FOR THE BENJAMINI-HOCHBERG PROCEDURE.

Authors:  William J Feser; Tasha E Fingerlin; Matthew J Strand; Deborah H Glueck
Journal:  J Stat Theory Appl       Date:  2009

8.  Estimating the Proportion of True Null Hypotheses Using the Pattern of Observed p-values.

Authors:  Tiejun Tong; Zeny Feng; Julia S Hilton; Hongyu Zhao
Journal:  J Appl Stat       Date:  2013-01-01       Impact factor: 1.404

Review 9.  Challenges and approaches to statistical design and inference in high-dimensional investigations.

Authors:  Gary L Gadbury; Karen A Garrett; David B Allison
Journal:  Methods Mol Biol       Date:  2009

10.  Relative power and sample size analysis on gene expression profiling data.

Authors:  M van Iterson; P A C 't Hoen; P Pedotti; G J E J Hooiveld; J T den Dunnen; G J B van Ommen; J M Boer; R X Menezes
Journal:  BMC Genomics       Date:  2009-09-17       Impact factor: 3.969

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.