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 *

240 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31844582)

  • 1. A comparison of random-field-theory and false-discovery-rate inference results in the analysis of registered one-dimensional biomechanical datasets.
    Naouma H; Pataky TC
    PeerJ; 2019; 7():e8189. PubMed ID: 31844582
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The probability of false positives in zero-dimensional analyses of one-dimensional kinematic, force and EMG trajectories.
    Pataky TC; Vanrenterghem J; Robinson MA
    J Biomech; 2016 Jun; 49(9):1468-1476. PubMed ID: 27067363
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Cluster-level statistical inference in fMRI datasets: The unexpected behavior of random fields in high dimensions.
    Bansal R; Peterson BS
    Magn Reson Imaging; 2018 Jun; 49():101-115. PubMed ID: 29408478
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Controlling the familywise error rate in widefield optical neuroimaging of functional connectivity in mice.
    White BR; Chan C; Adepoju T; Shinohara RT; Vandekar S
    Neurophotonics; 2023 Jan; 10(1):015004. PubMed ID: 36756004
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Influence of multiple hypothesis testing on reproducibility in neuroimaging research: A simulation study and Python-based software.
    Puoliväli T; Palva S; Palva JM
    J Neurosci Methods; 2020 May; 337():108654. PubMed ID: 32114144
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Zero- vs. one-dimensional, parametric vs. non-parametric, and confidence interval vs. hypothesis testing procedures in one-dimensional biomechanical trajectory analysis.
    Pataky TC; Vanrenterghem J; Robinson MA
    J Biomech; 2015 May; 48(7):1277-85. PubMed ID: 25817475
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. A voxelation-corrected non-stationary 3D cluster-size test based on random field theory.
    Li H; Nickerson LD; Zhao X; Nichols TE; Gao JH
    Neuroimage; 2015 Sep; 118():676-82. PubMed ID: 26067343
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Assessing the significance of pedobarographic signals using random field theory.
    Pataky TC
    J Biomech; 2008 Aug; 41(11):2465-73. PubMed ID: 18585723
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Geometry-derived statistical significance: A probabilistic framework for detecting true positive findings in MRI data.
    Bansal R; Peterson BS
    Brain Behav; 2023 Apr; 13(4):e2865. PubMed ID: 36869597
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The false discovery rate: a key concept in large-scale genetic studies.
    Chen JJ; Roberson PK; Schell MJ
    Cancer Control; 2010 Jan; 17(1):58-62. PubMed ID: 20010520
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. False discovery rate revisited: FDR and topological inference using Gaussian random fields.
    Chumbley JR; Friston KJ
    Neuroimage; 2009 Jan; 44(1):62-70. PubMed ID: 18603449
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. Statistical detection of EEG synchrony using empirical bayesian inference.
    Singh AK; Asoh H; Takeda Y; Phillips S
    PLoS One; 2015; 10(3):e0121795. PubMed ID: 25822617
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Enhanced false discovery rate using Gaussian mixture models for thresholding fMRI statistical maps.
    Pendse G; Borsook D; Becerra L
    Neuroimage; 2009 Aug; 47(1):231-61. PubMed ID: 19269334
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Nonstationary cluster-size inference with random field and permutation methods.
    Hayasaka S; Phan KL; Liberzon I; Worsley KJ; Nichols TE
    Neuroimage; 2004 Jun; 22(2):676-87. PubMed ID: 15193596
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Topological FDR for neuroimaging.
    Chumbley J; Worsley K; Flandin G; Friston K
    Neuroimage; 2010 Feb; 49(4):3057-64. PubMed ID: 19944173
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Statistical testing and power analysis for brain-wide association study.
    Gong W; Wan L; Lu W; Ma L; Cheng F; Cheng W; Grünewald S; Feng J
    Med Image Anal; 2018 Jul; 47():15-30. PubMed ID: 29656107
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Control of false discoveries in grouped hypothesis testing for eQTL data.
    Rudra P; Zhou YH; Nobel A; Wright FA
    BMC Bioinformatics; 2024 Apr; 25(1):147. PubMed ID: 38605284
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. False discovery rate and permutation test: an evaluation in ERP data analysis.
    Lage-Castellanos A; Martínez-Montes E; Hernández-Cabrera JA; Galán L
    Stat Med; 2010 Jan; 29(1):63-74. PubMed ID: 19941298
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 12.