Sources of variation in false discovery rate estimation include sample size, correlation, and inherent differences between groups.

17Citations
Citations of this article
31Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

High-throughtput technologies enable the testing of tens of thousands of measurements simultaneously. Identification of genes that are differentially expressed or associated with clinical outcomes invokes the multiple testing problem. False Discovery Rate (FDR) control is a statistical method used to correct for multiple comparisons for independent or weakly dependent test statistics. Although FDR control is frequently applied to microarray data analysis, gene expression is usually correlated, which might lead to inaccurate estimates. In this paper, we evaluate the accuracy of FDR estimation. Using two real data sets, we resampled subgroups of patients and recalculated statistics of interest to illustrate the imprecision of FDR estimation. Next, we generated many simulated data sets with block correlation structures and realistic noise parameters, using the Ultimate Microarray Prediction, Inference, and Reality Engine (UMPIRE) R package. We estimated FDR using a beta-uniform mixture (BUM) model, and examined the variation in FDR estimation. The three major sources of variation in FDR estimation are the sample size, correlations among genes, and the true proportion of differentially expressed genes (DEGs). The sample size and proportion of DEGs affect both magnitude and precision of FDR estimation, while the correlation structure mainly affects the variation of the estimated parameters. We have decomposed various factors that affect FDR estimation, and illustrated the direction and extent of the impact. We found that the proportion of DEGs has a significant impact on FDR; this factor might have been overlooked in previous studies and deserves more thought when controlling FDR.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Zhang, J., & Coombes, K. R. (2012). Sources of variation in false discovery rate estimation include sample size, correlation, and inherent differences between groups. BMC Bioinformatics, 13 Suppl 13. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-13-S13-S1

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free