Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20360960›Full record

ArticlePloS one2010

A robust procedure for comparing multiple means under heteroscedasticity in unbalanced designs.

Esther Herberich, Johannes Sikorski, Torsten Hothorn

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 74 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
74citing papers in PubMed
11.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

74 citing papers in PubMed, 293 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Multiple Contrast Tests in the Presence of Partial Heteroskedasticity.Biometrical journal. Biometrische Zeitschrift · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Metabolomic and Physiological Changes inJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Article
  17. Article
  18. The Evolution of Ecological Diversity inFrontiers in microbiology · 2022
    Article
  19. Dynamics of Bacterial Root Endophytes ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2022
    Article
  20. Article

14 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Esther HerberichInstitut für Statistik, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, München, Germany.
Johannes Sikorski
Torsten Hothorn
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München · DELeibniz Institute DSMZ – German Collection of Microorganisms and Cell Cultures · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Investigating differences between means of more than two groups or experimental conditions is a routine research question addressed in biology. In order to assess differences statistically, multiple comparison procedures are applied. The most prominent procedures of this type, the Dunnett and Tukey-Kramer test, control the probability of reporting at least one false positive result when the data are normally distributed and when the sample sizes and variances do not differ between groups. All three assumptions are non-realistic in biological research and any violation leads to an increased number of reported false positive results. Based on a general statistical framework for simultaneous inference and robust covariance estimators we propose a new statistical multiple comparison procedure for assessing multiple means. In contrast to the Dunnett or Tukey-Kramer tests, no assumptions regarding the distribution, sample sizes or variance homogeneity are necessary. The performance of the new procedure is assessed by means of its familywise error rate and power under different distributions. The practical merits are demonstrated by a reanalysis of fatty acid phenotypes of the bacterium Bacillus simplex from the "Evolution Canyons" I and II in Israel. The simulation results show that even under severely varying variances, the procedure controls the number of false positive findings very well. Thus, the here presented procedure works well under biologically realistic scenarios of unbalanced group sizes, non-normality and heteroscedasticity.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsAnalysis of VarianceBacillusComputersComputer SimulationEnvironmental MicrobiologyFalse Positive ReactionsFatty AcidsModels, StatisticalPhenotypeProgramming LanguagesReproducibility of ResultsSoftwareFatty Acids

Identifiers

PMID20360960
PMCPMC2847912
OpenAlexW2165389589

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.