Stevens John R, Al Masud Abdullah, Suyundikov Anvar
Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Utah State University, 3900 Old Main Hill, Logan, UT 84322-3900, United States of America.
Department of Biostatistics, Indiana University Fairbanks School of Public Health and Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN 46202, United States of America.
PLoS One. 2017 Apr 28;12(4):e0176124. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0176124. eCollection 2017.
In high dimensional data analysis (such as gene expression, spatial epidemiology, or brain imaging studies), we often test thousands or more hypotheses simultaneously. As the number of tests increases, the chance of observing some statistically significant tests is very high even when all null hypotheses are true. Consequently, we could reach incorrect conclusions regarding the hypotheses. Researchers frequently use multiplicity adjustment methods to control type I error rates-primarily the family-wise error rate (FWER) or the false discovery rate (FDR)-while still desiring high statistical power. In practice, such studies may have dependent test statistics (or p-values) as tests can be dependent on each other. However, some commonly-used multiplicity adjustment methods assume independent tests. We perform a simulation study comparing several of the most common adjustment methods involved in multiple hypothesis testing, under varying degrees of block-correlation positive dependence among tests.
在高维数据分析(如基因表达、空间流行病学或脑成像研究)中,我们常常会同时检验数千个或更多的假设。随着检验数量的增加,即使所有原假设均为真,观察到一些具有统计学显著性检验结果的可能性也非常高。因此,我们可能会就这些假设得出错误的结论。研究人员经常使用多重性调整方法来控制I型错误率——主要是家族性错误率(FWER)或错误发现率(FDR)——同时仍希望具有较高的统计功效。在实际中,此类研究可能会有相依的检验统计量(或p值),因为检验可能会相互依赖。然而,一些常用的多重性调整方法假定检验是独立的。我们进行了一项模拟研究,比较了多重假设检验中几种最常见的调整方法,这些检验在不同程度的块相关性正相依情况下进行。