↓ Skip to main content

A new multitest correction (SGoF) that increases its statistical power when increasing the number of tests

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Bioinformatics, July 2009
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
146 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
110 Mendeley
citeulike
9 CiteULike
connotea
1 Connotea
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A new multitest correction (SGoF) that increases its statistical power when increasing the number of tests
Published in
BMC Bioinformatics, July 2009
DOI 10.1186/1471-2105-10-209
Pubmed ID
Authors

Antonio Carvajal-Rodríguez, Jacobo de Uña-Alvarez, Emilio Rolán-Alvarez

Abstract

The detection of true significant cases under multiple testing is becoming a fundamental issue when analyzing high-dimensional biological data. Unfortunately, known multitest adjustments reduce their statistical power as the number of tests increase. We propose a new multitest adjustment, based on a sequential goodness of fit metatest (SGoF), which increases its statistical power with the number of tests. The method is compared with Bonferroni and FDR-based alternatives by simulating a multitest context via two different kinds of tests: 1) one-sample t-test, and 2) homogeneity G-test.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 110 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 5%
United Kingdom 2 2%
Norway 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Unknown 97 88%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 31 28%
Researcher 28 25%
Professor 11 10%
Student > Master 10 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 6 5%
Other 15 14%
Unknown 9 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 61 55%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 5%
Mathematics 5 5%
Computer Science 4 4%
Other 14 13%
Unknown 10 9%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 October 2022.
All research outputs
#2,927,224
of 23,476,369 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#985
of 7,394 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,001
of 111,568 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#5
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,476,369 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,394 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 111,568 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.