Lecture 27. December 13, Department of Biostatistics Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Johns Hopkins University.

Similar documents
Lecture 28. Ingo Ruczinski. December 3, Department of Biostatistics Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Johns Hopkins University

Simple Linear Regression. John McGready Johns Hopkins University

Lecture 21. December 19, Department of Biostatistics Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Johns Hopkins University.

Sampling Variability and Confidence Intervals. John McGready Johns Hopkins University

Lecture 23. November 15, Department of Biostatistics Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Johns Hopkins University.

1 Hypothesis testing for a single mean

Outline. 1. Define likelihood 2. Interpretations of likelihoods 3. Likelihood plots 4. Maximum likelihood 5. Likelihood ratio benchmarks

Statistics for laboratory scientists II

Section B. The Theoretical Sampling Distribution of the Sample Mean and Its Estimate Based on a Single Sample

Probability measures A probability measure, P, is a real valued function from the collection of possible events so that the following

From last time... The equations

Toxicokinetics: Absorption, Distribution, and Excretion. Michael A. Trush, PhD Johns Hopkins University

Example. Test for a proportion

Introduction to Structural Equations

Probability Pr(A) 0, for any event A. 2. Pr(S) = 1, for the sample space S. 3. If A and B are mutually exclusive, Pr(A or B) = Pr(A) + Pr(B).

High-throughput Testing

Advanced Structural Equations Models I

Looking at the Other Side of Bonferroni

Inference using structural equations with latent variables

SEM for Categorical Outcomes

Normalization. Example of Replicate Data. Biostatistics Rafael A. Irizarry

Chapter Seven: Multi-Sample Methods 1/52

PROCEDURES CONTROLLING THE k-fdr USING. BIVARIATE DISTRIBUTIONS OF THE NULL p-values. Sanat K. Sarkar and Wenge Guo

A Framework for the Study of Urban Health. Abdullah Baqui, DrPH, MPH, MBBS Johns Hopkins University

High-Throughput Sequencing Course. Introduction. Introduction. Multiple Testing. Biostatistics and Bioinformatics. Summer 2018

Class 19. Daniel B. Rowe, Ph.D. Department of Mathematics, Statistics, and Computer Science. Marquette University MATH 1700

Introduction to the Analysis of Variance (ANOVA)

Statistical Applications in Genetics and Molecular Biology

Linear Methods for Prediction

Peak Detection for Images

Table of Outcomes. Table of Outcomes. Table of Outcomes. Table of Outcomes. Table of Outcomes. Table of Outcomes. T=number of type 2 errors

Sequential Analysis & Testing Multiple Hypotheses,

Lecture 22. December 19, Department of Biostatistics Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Johns Hopkins University.

Week 5 Video 1 Relationship Mining Correlation Mining

Step-down FDR Procedures for Large Numbers of Hypotheses

Statistical methods for comparing multiple groups. Lecture 7: ANOVA. ANOVA: Definition. ANOVA: Concepts

Stat 206: Estimation and testing for a mean vector,

Multiple testing: Intro & FWER 1

Class 24. Daniel B. Rowe, Ph.D. Department of Mathematics, Statistics, and Computer Science. Marquette University MATH 1700

Statistical testing. Samantha Kleinberg. October 20, 2009

On Procedures Controlling the FDR for Testing Hierarchically Ordered Hypotheses

The miss rate for the analysis of gene expression data

Lecture 21: October 19

Summary and discussion of: Controlling the False Discovery Rate: A Practical and Powerful Approach to Multiple Testing

Family-wise Error Rate Control in QTL Mapping and Gene Ontology Graphs

Lecture 5. October 21, Department of Biostatistics Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Johns Hopkins University.

Lecture 25. Ingo Ruczinski. November 24, Department of Biostatistics Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Johns Hopkins University

Dr. Junchao Xia Center of Biophysics and Computational Biology. Fall /8/2016 1/38

Journal Club: Higher Criticism

Multiple Testing. Hoang Tran. Department of Statistics, Florida State University

STAT 461/561- Assignments, Year 2015

Neuroimaging for Machine Learners Validation and inference

Sample Size and Power I: Binary Outcomes. James Ware, PhD Harvard School of Public Health Boston, MA

CHL 5225H Advanced Statistical Methods for Clinical Trials: Multiplicity

Specific Differences. Lukas Meier, Seminar für Statistik

STAT 263/363: Experimental Design Winter 2016/17. Lecture 1 January 9. Why perform Design of Experiments (DOE)? There are at least two reasons:

Lecture 8. October 22, Department of Biostatistics Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Johns Hopkins University.

A Simple, Graphical Procedure for Comparing Multiple Treatment Effects

Multiple Testing. Tim Hanson. January, Modified from originals by Gary W. Oehlert. Department of Statistics University of South Carolina

Lecture 6 April

Lecture Testing Hypotheses: The Neyman-Pearson Paradigm

Review: General Approach to Hypothesis Testing. 1. Define the research question and formulate the appropriate null and alternative hypotheses.

Research Article Sample Size Calculation for Controlling False Discovery Proportion

COE428 Notes Week 4 (Week of Jan 30, 2017)

Improving the Performance of the FDR Procedure Using an Estimator for the Number of True Null Hypotheses

STA441: Spring Multiple Regression. This slide show is a free open source document. See the last slide for copyright information.

Chapter 10. Regression. Understandable Statistics Ninth Edition By Brase and Brase Prepared by Yixun Shi Bloomsburg University of Pennsylvania

Multiple Testing of General Contrasts: Truncated Closure and the Extended Shaffer-Royen Method

ON STEPWISE CONTROL OF THE GENERALIZED FAMILYWISE ERROR RATE. By Wenge Guo and M. Bhaskara Rao

MATH5745 Multivariate Methods Lecture 07

BIO5312 Biostatistics Lecture 6: Statistical hypothesis testings

Introduction to the Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) Computing One-Way Independent Measures (Between Subjects) ANOVAs

Lecture 7 April 16, 2018

The One-Way Independent-Samples ANOVA. (For Between-Subjects Designs)

LECTURE 5 HYPOTHESIS TESTING

STAT 5200 Handout #7a Contrasts & Post hoc Means Comparisons (Ch. 4-5)

280 CHAPTER 9 TESTS OF HYPOTHESES FOR A SINGLE SAMPLE Tests of Statistical Hypotheses

Hypothesis Tests and Estimation for Population Variances. Copyright 2014 Pearson Education, Inc.

Summary of Chapter 7 (Sections ) and Chapter 8 (Section 8.1)

Chapter 10: Analysis of variance (ANOVA)

Lecture 12: Multiple Hypothesis Testing

Lecture 5: ANOVA and Correlation

S.IC.4 Margin of Error for Estimating a Population Mean

New Procedures for False Discovery Control

Sample Size and Power Calculation in Microarray Studies Using the sizepower package.

POLI 443 Applied Political Research

STA442/2101: Assignment 5

Statistical Inference. Why Use Statistical Inference. Point Estimates. Point Estimates. Greg C Elvers

Lecture 7: Hypothesis Testing and ANOVA

COMPARING SEVERAL MEANS: ANOVA

Things you always wanted to know about statistics but were afraid to ask

Exceedance Control of the False Discovery Proportion Christopher Genovese 1 and Larry Wasserman 2 Carnegie Mellon University July 10, 2004

Extending the Robust Means Modeling Framework. Alyssa Counsell, Phil Chalmers, Matt Sigal, Rob Cribbie

A semi-bayesian study of Duncan's Bayesian multiple

Study Ch. 9.3, #47 53 (45 51), 55 61, (55 59)

New Approaches to False Discovery Control

Sanat Sarkar Department of Statistics, Temple University Philadelphia, PA 19122, U.S.A. September 11, Abstract

The optimal discovery procedure: a new approach to simultaneous significance testing

Quantitative Analysis and Empirical Methods

Department of Statistics University of Central Florida. Technical Report TR APR2007 Revised 25NOV2007

Transcription:

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike License. Your use of this material constitutes acceptance of that license and the conditions of use of materials on this site. Copyright 2008, The Johns Hopkins University and. All rights reserved. Use of these materials permitted only in accordance with license rights granted. Materials provided AS IS ; no representations or warranties provided. User assumes all responsibility for use, and all liability related thereto, and must independently review all materials for accuracy and efficacy. May contain materials owned by others. User is responsible for obtaining permissions for use from third parties as needed.

Lecture 27 Department of Biostatistics Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Johns Hopkins University December 13, 2007

1 2 3 4 5

1 Familywise error rates 2 procedure 3 Performance of with multiple independent tests 4 False discovery rate procedure

After rejecting a χ 2 omnibus test you do all pairwise comparisons You conducted a study with 20 outcomes and 30 different combinations of covariates. You consider significance at all combinations. You compare diseased tissue versus normal tissue expression levels for 20k genes You compare rest versus active at 300k voxels in an fmri study

Performing two α-level tests: H 1 0 versus H1 a and H 2 0 versus H2 a E 1 Reject H 1 0 and E 2 Reject H 2 0 FWE P(one or more false rej H 1 0, H 2 0 ) = P(E 1 E 2 H 1 0, H 2 0 ) = P(E 1 H 1 0, H 2 0 ) + P(E 2 H 1 0, H 2 0 ) P(E 1 E 2 H 1 0, H 2 0 ) P(E 1 H 1 0, H 2 0 ) + P(E 2 H 1 0, H 2 0 ) = 2 α Result : The familywise error rate for k hypotheses tested at level α is bounded by kα

Proof E i - false rejection for test i All probabilities are conditional on all of the nulls being true FWE = P(one or more false rej) = P( k i=1e i ) { } = P E 1 ( k i=2e i ) P(E 1 ) + P( k i=2e i ). P(E 1 ) + P(E 2 ) +... + P(E k ) = kα

Other direction The FWE is no larger than kα where k is the number of tests The FWE is no smaller than α P( k i=1e i ) P(E 1 ) = α The lower bound is obtained when the E i are identical E 1 = E 2 =... = E k s tests each individual hypothesis at level α = α/k The FWE is no larger than kα = kα/k = α The FWE is no smaller than α/k

s procedure If α is small and the tests are independent, then the upper bound on the FWE is nearly obtained FWE = P(one or more false rej) = 1 P(no false rej) = 1 P( k i=1ēi) = 1 (1 α ) k 1 (1 kα ) = kα = α

Recall the approximation for α near 0 hence f (α ) f (0) α 0 Scratch work f (0) f (α ) f (0) + α f (0) In our case f (α ) = (1 α ) k so f (0) = 1 f (α ) = k(1 α ) k 1 so f (0) = k Therefore (1 α ) k 1 kα

Notes For s procedure α = α/k so will be close to 0 for a large number of tests When there are lots of tests that are (close to) independent, the upper bound on the FWE used is appropriate When the test are closely related, then the FWE will be closer to the lower bound, and s procedure is conservative Is the familywise error rate always the most appropriate quantity to control for?

The false discovery rate is the proportion of tests that are falsely declared significant Controlling the is less conservative than controlling the FWE rate Introduced by Benjamini and Hochberg

Benjamini and Hochberg procedure 1 Order your k p-values, say p 1 < p 2 <... < p k 2 Define q i = kp i /i 3 Define F i = min(q i,..., q k ) 4 Reject for all i so that F i is less than the desired Note that the F i are increasing, so you only need to find the largest one so that F i <

1st 10 of 50 SNPs (Rosner page 581) Example Gene i p i q i = kp i /i F i 30 1 <.0001.0035.0035 20 2.011.28.16 48 3.017.28.16 50 4.017.22.16 4 5.018.18.16 40 6.019.16.16 7 7.026.18.18 14 8.034.21.21 26 9.042.23.23 47 10.048.24.24

Example cutoff.05/50 =.001; only the first Gene is significant For a of 0 15%; only the first Gene would be declared significant For a of 16 20%, the first 7 would be significant