Literature DB >> 18932151

Aesthetics and power considerations in multiple testing--a contradiction?

Gerhard Hommel1, Frank Bretz.   

Abstract

In this paper we discuss aesthetical concepts and requirements for reasonable multiple test procedures. Aesthetical considerations lead to logical decision patterns which are conceivable and, if possible, simple to use and to communicate. Such considerations are sometimes contradictory to the ubiquitous requirement of maximizing power for a multiple test procedure. We illustrate the necessary trade-offs with several examples. We start by considering important logical properties and then discuss three different concepts of monotonicity. Afterwards we have a closer look at the recently proposed "fallback procedure" and show that it has some less appealing properties. Finally, we investigate the distribution of the numbers of significant results with respect to both expectation and variance.

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18932151     DOI: 10.1002/bimj.200710463

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biom J        ISSN: 0323-3847            Impact factor:   2.207


  2 in total

1.  Fallback tests for co-primary endpoints.

Authors:  Robin Ristl; Florian Frommlet; Armin Koch; Martin Posch
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2016-02-25       Impact factor: 2.373

Review 2.  Recommendations for designing and analysing multi-arm non-inferiority trials: a review of methodology and current practice.

Authors:  Jake Emmerson; Susan Todd; Julia M Brown
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2021-06-26       Impact factor: 2.279

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.