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 *

140 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19259400)

  • 1. Estimating the proportion of true null hypotheses for multiple comparisons.
    Jiang H; Doerge RW
    Cancer Inform; 2008; 6():25-32. PubMed ID: 19259400
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. Bias and variance reduction in estimating the proportion of true-null hypotheses.
    Cheng Y; Gao D; Tong T
    Biostatistics; 2015 Jan; 16(1):189-204. PubMed ID: 24963010
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. SOME STEP-DOWN PROCEDURES CONTROLLING THE FALSE DISCOVERY RATE UNDER DEPENDENCE.
    Ge Y; Sealfon SC; Speed TP
    Stat Sin; 2008; 18(3):881-904. PubMed ID: 19018297
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. A direct approach to estimating false discovery rates conditional on covariates.
    Boca SM; Leek JT
    PeerJ; 2018; 6():e6035. PubMed ID: 30581661
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Estimating the Proportion of True Null Hypotheses Using the Pattern of Observed
    Tong T; Feng Z; Hilton JS; Zhao H
    J Appl Stat; 2013 Jan; 40(9):1949-1964. PubMed ID: 24078762
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Graphical approaches for the control of generalized error rates.
    Robertson DS; Wason JMS; Bretz F
    Stat Med; 2020 Oct; 39(23):3135-3155. PubMed ID: 32557848
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Towards accurate estimation of the proportion of true null hypotheses in multiple testing.
    Zhang SD
    PLoS One; 2011 Apr; 6(4):e18874. PubMed ID: 21526119
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Rank-invariant resampling based estimation of false discovery rate for analysis of small sample microarray data.
    Jain N; Cho H; O'Connell M; Lee JK
    BMC Bioinformatics; 2005 Jul; 6():187. PubMed ID: 16042779
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. Estimation of the proportion of true null hypotheses under sparse dependence: Adaptive FDR controlling in microarray data.
    Biswas A; Chakraborty S; Baruah VJ
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2022 May; 31(5):917-927. PubMed ID: 35133933
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Multiple test procedures using an upper bound of the number of true hypotheses and their use for evaluating high-dimensional EEG data.
    Hemmelmann C; Ziegler A; Guiard V; Weiss S; Walther M; Vollandt R
    J Neurosci Methods; 2008 May; 170(1):158-64. PubMed ID: 18279970
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. POWER-ENHANCED MULTIPLE DECISION FUNCTIONS CONTROLLING FAMILY-WISE ERROR AND FALSE DISCOVERY RATES.
    Peña EA; Habiger JD; Wu W
    Ann Stat; 2011 Feb; 39(1):556-583. PubMed ID: 25018568
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A multiple-testing procedure for high-dimensional mediation hypotheses.
    Dai JY; Stanford JL; LeBlanc M
    J Am Stat Assoc; 2022; 117(537):198-213. PubMed ID: 35400115
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Controlling the false discovery rate with constraints: the Newman-Keuls test revisited.
    Shaffer JP
    Biom J; 2007 Feb; 49(1):136-43. PubMed ID: 17342955
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. A weighted FDR procedure under discrete and heterogeneous null distributions.
    Chen X; Doerge RW; Sarkar SK
    Biom J; 2020 Oct; 62(6):1544-1563. PubMed ID: 32367597
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Augmentation procedures for control of the generalized family-wise error rate and tail probabilities for the proportion of false positives.
    van der Laan MJ; Dudoit S; Pollard KS
    Stat Appl Genet Mol Biol; 2004; 3():Article15. PubMed ID: 16646793
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. ConReg-R: Extrapolative recalibration of the empirical distribution of p-values to improve false discovery rate estimates.
    Li J; Paramita P; Choi KP; Karuturi RK
    Biol Direct; 2011 May; 6():27. PubMed ID: 21595983
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Online control of the familywise error rate.
    Tian J; Ramdas A
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2021 Apr; 30(4):976-993. PubMed ID: 33413033
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.