ArticleGenetic epidemiology2011
Multiple testing in high-throughput sequence data: experiences from Group 8 of Genetic Analysis Workshop 17.
Article in Genetic epidemiology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The use of high-throughput sequence data in genetic epidemiology allows the investigation of common and rare variants in the entire genome, thus increasing the amount of information and the potential number of statistical tests performed within one study. As a consequence, the problem of multiple testing may become even more pressing than in previous studies. As an important challenge, the exact number of statistical tests depends on the actual statistical method used. Furthermore, many statistical approaches for the analysis of sequence data require permutation. Thus it may be difficult to also use permutation to estimate correct type I error levels as in genome-wide association studies. In view of this, a separate group at Genetic Analysis Workshop 17 was formed with a focus on multiple testing. Here, we present the approaches used for the workshop. Apart from tackling the multiple testing problem, the new group focused on different issues. Some contributors developed and investigated modifications of existing collapsing methods. Others aimed at improving the identification of functional variants through a reduction and analysis of the underlying data dimensions. Two research groups investigated the overall accumulation of rare variation across the genome and its value in predicting phenotypes. Finally, other investigators left the path of traditional statistical analyses by reversing null and alternative hypotheses and by proposing a novel resampling method. We describe and discuss all these approaches.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.