Truncated product method for combining P‐values

By Dmitri V. Zaykin, Lev A. Zhivotovsky, Peter Westfall, Bruce S. Weir. 2002

555 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Genetics

Citations in the corpus

Effect Modification and Design Sensitivity in Observational Studies (2013, methodology): “…≤ 0.05/2 = 0.025, and in this case, P∧ ≤ 0.025 and ∏L =1 P ≤ 0.025; however, Fisher’s method gives p-value 0.1172 if ∏L =1 P = 0.025, whereas the method of Zaykin et al. (2002) gives p-value 0.05 if P∧ = 0.025, so P∧ rejects whenever the Bonferroni inequality rejects and would also reject if P1…”
A Groupwise Association Test for Rare Mutations Using a Weighted Sum Statistic (2009, methodology): “uniformly(0,1) distributed under the nullhypothesis, T is x(2)-distributed with 2G degrees of freedom, and can be evaluated accordingly [42,43].”
GATES: a rapid and powerful gene-based association test using extended Simes procedure. (2011, methodology): “A variant of the Fisher’s method is the truncated-product p value method,(14) which was originally developed to deal with ‘‘publication bias’’ in meta-analysis.(15) However, like the Fisher’s combinationmethod, this test is also sensitive to LD among the SNPs in a gene and therefore requires a permu”
Interspecific variation in avian blood parasites and haematology associated with urbanization in a desert habitat (2008, background): “Multiple univariate comparisons (n 5) of hematological variables necessitated the re-adjustment of alpha levels (Zaykin et al. 2002).”
Multiple Testing for Exploratory Research (2011, methodology): “The literature on shortcuts in the closed testing procedure has been focused mainly on consonant procedures, and on finding the rejected individual hypotheses (Grechanovsky and Hochberg, 1999; Zaykin et al., 2002; Hommel, Bretz and Maurer, 2007; Bittman et al., 2009; Brannath and Bretz, 2010).”
Arguments for rejecting the sequential Bonferroni in ecological studies (2003, background): “The basic problem is that when multiple tests are undertaken, each at the same significance level ( ), the probability of achieving at least one significant result is greater than that significance level (Zaykin et al. 2002).”