Literature DB >> 25735771

Estimating the proportion of true null hypotheses when the statistics are discrete.

Isaac Dialsingh1, Stefanie R Austin2, Naomi S Altman2.   

Abstract

MOTIVATION: In high-dimensional testing problems π0, the proportion of null hypotheses that are true is an important parameter. For discrete test statistics, the P values come from a discrete distribution with finite support and the null distribution may depend on an ancillary statistic such as a table margin that varies among the test statistics. Methods for estimating π0 developed for continuous test statistics, which depend on a uniform or identical null distribution of P values, may not perform well when applied to discrete testing problems.
RESULTS: This article introduces a number of π0 estimators, the regression and 'T' methods that perform well with discrete test statistics and also assesses how well methods developed for or adapted from continuous tests perform with discrete tests. We demonstrate the usefulness of these estimators in the analysis of high-throughput biological RNA-seq and single-nucleotide polymorphism data.
AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: implemented in R.
© The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25735771      PMCID: PMC4495288          DOI: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btv104

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Bioinformatics        ISSN: 1367-4803            Impact factor:   6.937


  13 in total

1.  Estimating the occurrence of false positives and false negatives in microarray studies by approximating and partitioning the empirical distribution of p-values.

Authors:  Stan Pounds; Stephan W Morris
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2003-07-01       Impact factor: 6.937

2.  Improving false discovery rate estimation.

Authors:  Stan Pounds; Cheng Cheng
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2004-02-26       Impact factor: 6.937

3.  Genome-wide expression profiling and identification of gene activities during early flower development in Arabidopsis.

Authors:  Xiaohong Zhang; Baomin Feng; Qing Zhang; Diya Zhang; Naomi Altman; Hong Ma
Journal:  Plant Mol Biol       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 4.076

4.  Robust estimation of the false discovery rate.

Authors:  Stan Pounds; Cheng Cheng
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2006-06-15       Impact factor: 6.937

5.  A censored beta mixture model for the estimation of the proportion of non-differentially expressed genes.

Authors:  Anastasios Markitsis; Yinglei Lai
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2010-01-15       Impact factor: 6.937

6.  Estimation of false discovery rate using sequential permutation p-values.

Authors:  Tim Bancroft; Chuanlong Du; Dan Nettleton
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2013-02-04       Impact factor: 2.571

7.  A modified Bonferroni method for discrete data.

Authors:  R E Tarone
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1990-06       Impact factor: 2.571

8.  Sex-specific and lineage-specific alternative splicing in primates.

Authors:  Ran Blekhman; John C Marioni; Paul Zumbo; Matthew Stephens; Yoav Gilad
Journal:  Genome Res       Date:  2009-12-15       Impact factor: 9.043

9.  edgeR: a Bioconductor package for differential expression analysis of digital gene expression data.

Authors:  Mark D Robinson; Davis J McCarthy; Gordon K Smyth
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2009-11-11       Impact factor: 6.937

10.  A unified approach to false discovery rate estimation.

Authors:  Korbinian Strimmer
Journal:  BMC Bioinformatics       Date:  2008-07-09       Impact factor: 3.169

View more
  6 in total

1.  reChIP-seq reveals widespread bivalency of H3K4me3 and H3K27me3 in CD4(+) memory T cells.

Authors:  Sarah Kinkley; Johannes Helmuth; Julia K Polansky; Ilona Dunkel; Gilles Gasparoni; Sebastian Fröhler; Wei Chen; Jörn Walter; Alf Hamann; Ho-Ryun Chung
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2016-08-17       Impact factor: 14.919

2.  MultipleTesting.com: A tool for life science researchers for multiple hypothesis testing correction.

Authors:  Otília Menyhart; Boglárka Weltz; Balázs Győrffy
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-06-09       Impact factor: 3.752

3.  The effects of natural selection across molecular pathways in Drosophila melanogaster.

Authors:  Jeffrey P Vedanayagam; Daniel Garrigan
Journal:  BMC Evol Biol       Date:  2015-09-21       Impact factor: 3.260

4.  Variance component testing for identifying differentially expressed genes in RNA-seq data.

Authors:  Sheng Yang; Fang Shao; Weiwei Duan; Yang Zhao; Feng Chen
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2017-09-08       Impact factor: 2.984

5.  Evaluation of copy-number variants as modifiers of breast and ovarian cancer risk for BRCA1 pathogenic variant carriers.

Authors:  Logan C Walker; Louise Marquart; John F Pearson; George A R Wiggins; Tracy A O'Mara; Michael T Parsons; Daniel Barrowdale; Lesley McGuffog; Joe Dennis; Javier Benitez; Thomas P Slavin; Paolo Radice; Debra Frost; Andrew K Godwin; Alfons Meindl; Rita Katharina Schmutzler; Claudine Isaacs; Beth N Peshkin; Trinidad Caldes; Frans Bl Hogervorst; Conxi Lazaro; Anna Jakubowska; Marco Montagna; Xiaoqing Chen; Kenneth Offit; Peter J Hulick; Irene L Andrulis; Annika Lindblom; Robert L Nussbaum; Katherine L Nathanson; Georgia Chenevix-Trench; Antonis C Antoniou; Fergus J Couch; Amanda B Spurdle
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2017-02-01       Impact factor: 4.246

6.  Voxelwise statistical methods to localize practice variation in brain tumor surgery.

Authors:  Roelant Eijgelaar; Philip C De Witt Hamer; Carel F W Peeters; Frederik Barkhof; Marcel van Herk; Marnix G Witte
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-09-27       Impact factor: 3.240

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.