ArticleBiometrics2025
A unified combination framework for dependent tests with applications to microbiome association studies.
Article in Biometrics, 2025. 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.
- Power-enhanced two-sample mean tests for high-dimensional microbiome compositional data.Biometrics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
We introduce a novel meta-analysis framework to combine dependent tests under a general setting, and utilize it to synthesize various microbiome association tests that are calculated from the same dataset. Our development builds upon the classical meta-analysis methods of aggregating P-values and also a more recent general method of combining confidence distributions, but makes generalizations to handle dependent tests. The proposed framework ensures rigorous statistical guarantees, and we provide a comprehensive study and compare it with various existing dependent combination methods. Notably, we demonstrate that the widely used Cauchy combination method for dependent tests, referred to as the vanilla Cauchy combination in this article, can be viewed as a special case within our framework. Moreover, the proposed framework provides a way to address the problem when the distributional assumptions underlying the vanilla Cauchy combination are violated. Our numerical results demonstrate that ignoring the dependence among the to-be-combined components may lead to a severe size distortion phenomenon. Compared to the existing P-value combination methods, including the vanilla Cauchy combination method and other methods, the proposed combination framework is flexible and can be adapted to handle the dependence accurately and utilizes the information efficiently to construct tests with accurate size and enhanced power. The development is applied to the microbiome association studies, where we aggregate information from multiple existing tests using the same dataset. The combined tests harness the strengths of each individual test across a wide range of alternative spaces, enabling more efficient and meaningful discoveries of vital microbiome associations.
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.