ArticleGenome biology2025
Beware of counter-intuitive levels of false discoveries in datasets with strong intra-correlations.
Article in Genome biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Clinical lipidomics in bacterial sepsis: a systematic review of serum and plasma evaluations.Metabolomics : Official journal of the Metabolomic Society · 2026Pooled it
- Comment on "Robot-Assisted Radical Cystectomy in the Very Elderly: A Propensity Score-Matched Comparison of Outcomes Between Patients Aged ≥ 85 Versus 75-84 Years".Geriatrics & gerontology international · 2026Article
- Rhizosphere Microbiome Dynamics Associated with Root Rot inMicroorganisms · 2026Article
- High-precision binary trait association on phylogenetic trees.Microbial genomics · 2026Article
- Canine Periodontal Disease in an Urban Clinical Setting and Its Relationship with Host Factors and the Subgingival Bacterial Profile in Ecuador.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Article
- AI platform for CRISPR functional mapping and function-based drug design.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Exposome influences: a multi-omics perspective on the combined toxic effects of pharmaceuticals and personal care products in Alzheimer's disease.Frontiers in toxicology · 2026Review
- Beware of counter-intuitive levels of false discoveries in datasets with strong intra-correlations.Genome biology · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The false discovery rate (FDR) controlling method by Benjamini and Hochberg (BH) is a popular choice in the omics fields. Here, we demonstrate that in datasets with a large degree of dependencies between features, FDR correction methods like BH can sometimes counter-intuitively report very high numbers of false positives, potentially misleading researchers. We call the attention of researchers to use suited multiple testing strategies and approaches like synthetic null data (negative control) to identify and minimize caveats related to false discoveries, as in the cases where false findings do occur, they may be numerous.
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.