Paper detail

Is the familywise error rate in genomics controlled by methods based on the effective number of independent tests?

In genome-wide association (GWA) studies the goal is to detect association between one or more genetic markers and a given phenotype. The number of genetic markers in a GWA study can be in the order hundreds of thousands and therefore multiple testing methods are needed. This paper presents a set of popular methods to be used to correct for multiple testing in GWA studies. All are based on the concept of estimating an effective number of independent tests. We compare these methods using simulated data and data from the TOP study, and show that the effective number of independent tests is not additive over blocks of independent genetic markers unless we assume a common value for the local significance level. We also show that the reviewed methods based on estimating the effective number of independent tests in general do not control the familywise error rate.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 authors2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.