Sentences with phrase «false discovery rate of»

Our use of a false discovery rate of 0.2 as a threshold for calling differential methylation implies that we expect at most 20 % of our calls to be erroneous.

It is clear, however, that evidence of an excess of amino acid substitutions (at least from site - by - site tests) is no longer a sufficiently convincing demonstration of selection, not only because a high ratio could result from selection on synonymous mutations rather than positive selection on proteins [5], but also because there is potentially a high false discovery rate of selected sites [6].

The false discovery rate of the AMT tag analysis was estimated using an 11 - Da shift strategy as previously described [27].

Genes were considered to be differentially expressed if they had an adjusted p - value of 0.05 or less (equivalent to a false discovery rate of 5 %).

Not exact matches

Throughout, Q values indicate significance of differences after adjusting for multiple comparisons by controlling the false discovery rate for selected comparisons.

Q values indicate significance of differences after adjusting for multiple comparisons by controlling the false discovery rate for selected comparisons.

For an actual estimate of how likely a result is to be true or false, said Ioannidis, researchers should instead use false - discovery rates or Bayes factor calculations.

Each of these metabolites was found to have false discovery rates (FDRs) of less than 10 % (SI Appendix, Table S1 A and B).

We used a false discovery rate rather than standard significance measures to avoid an inflated false - positive rate as a consequence of the large number of hypothesis tests (42).

We discuss common correction schemes such as Bonferroni, Holm, Benjamini & Hochberg and Storey's q and show how they impact the false positive rate (FPR), false discovery rate (FDR) and power of a batch of tests.

Under basal growth conditions, 1235 genes were essential for cell fitness at a false - discovery rate of 5...

Among the 19,579 genes that are expressed in either tissue, 63.14 % (12,363) are differentially expressed with a false discovery rate (FDR) of less than 5 %.

False - discovery rate (FDR) was used to correct for multiple testing and to estimate the number of false positives False - discovery rate (FDR) was used to correct for multiple testing and to estimate the number of false positives false positives [55].

Results: We validate our approach using data with known copy number, identifying the vast majority of aneuploidies with a low rate of false discovery.

Using 5 % false discovery rate in ANOVA calculation in any of the 3 comparisons (CGR8 vs. E14TG2a vs. R1), there are 137 genes (0.9 % of the analyzed transcripts) that show a 2-fold difference or higher in expression levels among the three lines; 34 of these genes are > 2-fold higher or lower expressed in E14TG2a, 5 in CGR8 and 11 in R1 cells.

A 5 % false discovery rate in ANOVA calculation and a 2-fold difference or higher in any of the 3 comparisons (CGR8 vs. E14TG2a vs. R1) led to a set of 137 differentially expressed genes (0.9 % of the analyzed transcripts).

In these analyses, we identify and subsequently analyze a set of 107 autosomal genes with a false discovery rate (FDR) of < 30 %; in total, this larger set of genes harbor de novo loss of function (LoF) mutations in 5 % of cases, and numerous de novo missense and inherited LoF mutations in additional cases.

In contrast to Ex-miRNA, none of the miRNA in total plasma remained statistically significant if the false discovery rate was below 15 percent.

A probe and the containing promoter were called differentially methylated if the p - value of the probe t - statistic was at most 0.05 (uncorrected for multiple testing), log2-fold change between the groups was at least 0.25, and the false discovery rates (FDR) of the promoter - level statistic was at most 0.2.

The «false discovery rate» (FDR) is used throughout the text to judge the statistical strength of our results.

As a number of regressions were completed, the false discovery rate method was used to control for potential type I error (Benjamini & Hockberg, 1995).

In order to control for type 1 error when conducting multiple comparisons, Benjamini and Hochberg's (1995) rough false discovery rate was used and the level of significance was measured at below 0.025.