These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

372 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16800000)

  • 1. Stratified false discovery control for large-scale hypothesis testing with application to genome-wide association studies.
    Sun L; Craiu RV; Paterson AD; Bull SB
    Genet Epidemiol; 2006 Sep; 30(6):519-30. PubMed ID: 16800000
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Improving power of genome-wide association studies with weighted false discovery rate control and prioritized subset analysis.
    Lin WY; Lee WC
    PLoS One; 2012; 7(4):e33716. PubMed ID: 22496761
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Were genome-wide linkage studies a waste of time? Exploiting candidate regions within genome-wide association studies.
    Yoo YJ; Bull SB; Paterson AD; Waggott D; Sun L;
    Genet Epidemiol; 2010 Feb; 34(2):107-18. PubMed ID: 19626703
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Universal false discovery rate estimation methodology for genome-wide association studies.
    Forner K; Lamarine M; Guedj M; Dauvillier J; Wojcik J
    Hum Hered; 2008; 65(4):183-94. PubMed ID: 18073488
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Analysis of multilocus models of association.
    Devlin B; Roeder K; Wasserman L
    Genet Epidemiol; 2003 Jul; 25(1):36-47. PubMed ID: 12813725
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Re-sampling strategy to improve the estimation of number of null hypotheses in FDR control under strong correlation structures.
    Lu X; Perkins DL
    BMC Bioinformatics; 2007 May; 8():157. PubMed ID: 17509157
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Impaired performance of FDR-based strategies in whole-genome association studies when SNPs are excluded prior to the analysis.
    Marenne G; Dalmasso C; Perdry H; Génin E; Broët P
    Genet Epidemiol; 2009 Jan; 33(1):45-53. PubMed ID: 18618761
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Controlling the Rate of GWAS False Discoveries.
    Brzyski D; Peterson CB; Sobczyk P; Candès EJ; Bogdan M; Sabatti C
    Genetics; 2017 Jan; 205(1):61-75. PubMed ID: 27784720
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. ExactFDR: exact computation of false discovery rate estimate in case-control association studies.
    Wojcik J; Forner K
    Bioinformatics; 2008 Oct; 24(20):2407-8. PubMed ID: 18662924
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Penalized multimarker vs. single-marker regression methods for genome-wide association studies of quantitative traits.
    Yi H; Breheny P; Imam N; Liu Y; Hoeschele I
    Genetics; 2015 Jan; 199(1):205-22. PubMed ID: 25354699
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. On the operational characteristics of the Benjamini and Hochberg False Discovery Rate procedure.
    Green GH; Diggle PJ
    Stat Appl Genet Mol Biol; 2007; 6():Article27. PubMed ID: 18052910
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Relaxed significance criteria for linkage analysis.
    Chen L; Storey JD
    Genetics; 2006 Aug; 173(4):2371-81. PubMed ID: 16783025
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. A note on using permutation-based false discovery rate estimates to compare different analysis methods for microarray data.
    Xie Y; Pan W; Khodursky AB
    Bioinformatics; 2005 Dec; 21(23):4280-8. PubMed ID: 16188930
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Control procedures and estimators of the false discovery rate and their application in low-dimensional settings: an empirical investigation.
    Brinster R; Köttgen A; Tayo BO; Schumacher M; Sekula P;
    BMC Bioinformatics; 2018 Mar; 19(1):78. PubMed ID: 29499647
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A pleiotropy-informed Bayesian false discovery rate adapted to a shared control design finds new disease associations from GWAS summary statistics.
    Liley J; Wallace C
    PLoS Genet; 2015 Feb; 11(2):e1004926. PubMed ID: 25658688
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Wavelet thresholding with bayesian false discovery rate control.
    Tadesse MG; Ibrahim JG; Vannucci M; Gentleman R
    Biometrics; 2005 Mar; 61(1):25-35. PubMed ID: 15737075
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Comparison of methods for estimating the number of true null hypotheses in multiplicity testing.
    Hsueh HM; Chen JJ; Kodell RL
    J Biopharm Stat; 2003 Nov; 13(4):675-89. PubMed ID: 14584715
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Improved correction for population stratification in genome-wide association studies by identifying hidden population structures.
    Li Q; Yu K
    Genet Epidemiol; 2008 Apr; 32(3):215-26. PubMed ID: 18161052
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Power and type I error rate of false discovery rate approaches in genome-wide association studies.
    Yang Q; Cui J; Chazaro I; Cupples LA; Demissie S
    BMC Genet; 2005 Dec; 6 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):S134. PubMed ID: 16451593
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. A mixed model reduces spurious genetic associations produced by population stratification in genome-wide association studies.
    Shin J; Lee C
    Genomics; 2015 Apr; 105(4):191-6. PubMed ID: 25640449
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 19.