176 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21741470)
1. Work efficiency: a new criterion for comprehensive comparison and evaluation of statistical methods in large-scale identification of differentially expressed genes.
Tan YD
Genomics; 2011 Nov; 98(5):390-9. PubMed ID: 21741470
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Evaluation of a statistical equivalence test applied to microarray data.
Qiu J; Cui X
J Biopharm Stat; 2010 Mar; 20(2):240-66. PubMed ID: 20309757
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Comparison of methods for identifying differentially expressed genes across multiple conditions from microarray data.
Tan Y; Liu Y
Bioinformation; 2011; 7(8):400-4. PubMed ID: 22347782
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Model selection based on FDR-thresholding optimizing the area under the ROC-curve.
Graf AC; Bauer P
Stat Appl Genet Mol Biol; 2009; 8():Article31. PubMed ID: 19572830
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. An investigation on performance of Significance Analysis of Microarray (SAM) for the comparisons of several treatments with one control in the presence of small-variance genes.
Lin D; Shkedy Z; Burzykowski T; Ion R; Göhlmann HW; Bondt AD; Perer T; Geerts T; Van den Wyngaert I; Bijnens L
Biom J; 2008 Oct; 50(5):801-23. PubMed ID: 18932139
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Estimating the false discovery rate using nonparametric deconvolution.
van de Wiel MA; Kim KI
Biometrics; 2007 Sep; 63(3):806-15. PubMed ID: 17825012
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. Multidimensional local false discovery rate for microarray studies.
Ploner A; Calza S; Gusnanto A; Pawitan Y
Bioinformatics; 2006 Mar; 22(5):556-65. PubMed ID: 16368770
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Comparison of false discovery rate methods in identifying genes with differential expression.
Qian HR; Huang S
Genomics; 2005 Oct; 86(4):495-503. PubMed ID: 16054333
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Comparison of seven methods for producing Affymetrix expression scores based on False Discovery Rates in disease profiling data.
Shedden K; Chen W; Kuick R; Ghosh D; Macdonald J; Cho KR; Giordano TJ; Gruber SB; Fearon ER; Taylor JM; Hanash S
BMC Bioinformatics; 2005 Feb; 6():26. PubMed ID: 15705192
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Sample size for FDR-control in microarray data analysis.
Jung SH
Bioinformatics; 2005 Jul; 21(14):3097-104. PubMed ID: 15845654
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Selection of differentially expressed genes in microarray data analysis.
Chen JJ; Wang SJ; Tsai CA; Lin CJ
Pharmacogenomics J; 2007 Jun; 7(3):212-20. PubMed ID: 16940966
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Improved estimation of the noncentrality parameter distribution from a large number of t-statistics, with applications to false discovery rate estimation in microarray data analysis.
Qu L; Nettleton D; Dekkers JC
Biometrics; 2012 Dec; 68(4):1178-87. PubMed ID: 22551000
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Practical FDR-based sample size calculations in microarray experiments.
Hu J; Zou F; Wright FA
Bioinformatics; 2005 Aug; 21(15):3264-72. PubMed ID: 15932903
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Significance analysis of ROC indices for comparing diagnostic markers: applications to gene microarray data.
Tsai CA; Chen JJ
J Biopharm Stat; 2004 Nov; 14(4):985-1003. PubMed ID: 15587976
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. A practical false discovery rate approach to identifying patterns of differential expression in microarray data.
Grant GR; Liu J; Stoeckert CJ
Bioinformatics; 2005 Jun; 21(11):2684-90. PubMed ID: 15797908
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Bias in the estimation of false discovery rate in microarray studies.
Pawitan Y; Murthy KR; Michiels S; Ploner A
Bioinformatics; 2005 Oct; 21(20):3865-72. PubMed ID: 16105901
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Estimation of false discovery proportion under general dependence.
Pawitan Y; Calza S; Ploner A
Bioinformatics; 2006 Dec; 22(24):3025-31. PubMed ID: 17046978
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. twilight; a Bioconductor package for estimating the local false discovery rate.
Scheid S; Spang R
Bioinformatics; 2005 Jun; 21(12):2921-2. PubMed ID: 15817688
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. 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]
[Next] [New Search]
