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 *

104 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21389730)

  • 1. Application of the optimal discovery procedure to genetic case-control studies: comparison with p values and asymptotic Bayes factors.
    Tachmazidou I; De Iorio M; Dudbridge F
    Hum Hered; 2011; 71(1):37-49. PubMed ID: 21389730
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The optimal discovery procedure in multiple significance testing: an empirical Bayes approach.
    Noma H; Matsui S
    Stat Med; 2012 Jan; 31(2):165-76. PubMed ID: 21969277
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Bayesian optimal discovery procedure for simultaneous significance testing.
    Cao J; Xie XJ; Zhang S; Whitehurst A; White MA
    BMC Bioinformatics; 2009 Jan; 10():5. PubMed ID: 19126217
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Efficient testing and effect size estimation for set-based genetic association inference via semiparametric multilevel mixture modeling.
    Sugasawa S; Noma H
    Biom J; 2022 Aug; 64(6):1142-1152. PubMed ID: 35543501
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. A Bayesian Approach to the Overlap Analysis of Epidemiologically Linked Traits.
    Asimit JL; Panoutsopoulou K; Wheeler E; Berndt SI; ; Cordell HJ; Morris AP; Zeggini E; Barroso I
    Genet Epidemiol; 2015 Dec; 39(8):624-34. PubMed ID: 26411566
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. A computationally efficient modular optimal discovery procedure.
    Woo S; Leek JT; Storey JD
    Bioinformatics; 2011 Feb; 27(4):509-15. PubMed ID: 21186247
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. An empirical Bayes optimal discovery procedure based on semiparametric hierarchical mixture models.
    Noma H; Matsui S
    Comput Math Methods Med; 2013; 2013():568480. PubMed ID: 23690877
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Bayes factor based on the trend test incorporating Hardy-Weinberg disequilibrium: more power to detect genetic association.
    Xu J; Yuan A; Zheng G
    Ann Hum Genet; 2012 Jul; 76(4):301-11. PubMed ID: 22607017
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Comparison of six statistics of genetic association regarding their ability to discriminate between causal variants and genetically linked markers.
    Lorenzo Bermejo J; Garcia Perez A; Brandt A; Hemminki K; Matthews AG
    Hum Hered; 2011; 72(2):142-52. PubMed ID: 22025134
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Novel bayes factors that capture expert uncertainty in prior density specification in genetic association studies.
    Spencer AV; Cox A; Lin WY; Easton DF; Michailidou K; Walters K
    Genet Epidemiol; 2015 May; 39(4):239-48. PubMed ID: 25727067
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. How powerful are summary-based methods for identifying expression-trait associations under different genetic architectures?
    Veturi Y; Ritchie MD
    Pac Symp Biocomput; 2018; 23():228-239. PubMed ID: 29218884
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. A Bayesian Discovery Procedure.
    Guindani M; Müller P; Zhang S
    J R Stat Soc Series B Stat Methodol; 2009 Nov; 71(5):905-925. PubMed ID: 20694043
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Where is the causal variant? On the advantage of the family design over the case-control design in genetic association studies.
    Dandine-Roulland C; Perdry H
    Eur J Hum Genet; 2015 Oct; 23(10):1357-63. PubMed ID: 25585700
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Ranking of genome-wide association scan signals by different measures.
    Strömberg U; Björk J; Vineis P; Broberg K; Zeggini E
    Int J Epidemiol; 2009 Oct; 38(5):1364-73. PubMed ID: 19734549
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Parametric estimation of the local false discovery rate for identifying genetic associations.
    Yang Y; Aghababazadeh FA; Bickel DR
    IEEE/ACM Trans Comput Biol Bioinform; 2013; 10(1):98-108. PubMed ID: 23702547
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Empirical Bayes screening of many p-values with applications to microarray studies.
    Datta S; Datta S
    Bioinformatics; 2005 May; 21(9):1987-94. PubMed ID: 15691856
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Power estimation and sample size determination for replication studies of genome-wide association studies.
    Jiang W; Yu W
    BMC Genomics; 2016 Jan; 17 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):3. PubMed ID: 26818952
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Semi-parametric empirical Bayes factor for genome-wide association studies.
    Morisawa J; Otani T; Nishino J; Emoto R; Takahashi K; Matsui S
    Eur J Hum Genet; 2021 May; 29(5):800-807. PubMed ID: 33495595
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Using Bayes model averaging to leverage both gene main effects and G ×  E interactions to identify genomic regions in genome-wide association studies.
    Moss LC; Gauderman WJ; Lewinger JP; Conti DV
    Genet Epidemiol; 2019 Mar; 43(2):150-165. PubMed ID: 30456811
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Evaluations of the Optimal Discovery Procedure for Multiple Testing.
    Rubin DB
    Int J Biostat; 2016 May; 12(1):21-9. PubMed ID: 27227716
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.