Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigExact(17)
A common weakness of this approach is its lack of consistency and reproducibility [ 18- 22] resulting in the false positive paradox whereby falsely significant gene-expression signatures are identified more frequently than truly significant ones [ 16].
For each delta value, SAM estimates the false discovery rate (FDR) from the average number of falsely significant genes in all the permutations divided by the number of permutations.
Despite some fluctuations on the data, mainly due to sampling and data extraction, a positive but no significant trend in the number of falsely significant markers could be observed according to the increase of phenocopy error percentage (figure 2).
The estimated number of "falsely significant" probe sets was defined as the average of the number of "falsely significant" probe sets from all permutations.
In addition, multiple comparisons may increase the probability of falsely significant findings.
To avoid finding falsely significant results, we performed an inferential statistical procedure similar to Levene's test.
Similar(42)
Of the 4016 genome wide falsely-significant SNPs, 3120 (77.7%) SNPs are removed by removing those SNPs whose minor allele frequency difference is greater than 0.01.However, there are still 832 (21% of the 4016 SNPs) that have passed the filter.
With regard to the test for interactive effects, the significance level (type I error rate) is the probability of falsely reporting significant interaction.
In an effort to minimize the risk of falsely identifying significant results with multiple comparisons, all variables were specified and judged a priori to be clinically sound.
Note that this is a highly conservative threshold, intended to guarantee that no more than 5% of the permutations result in one or more gene sets (falsely) called significant.
If overdispersion was detected, then a negative binomial GLARMA model would be fitted to the data to account for overdispersion and reduce the chance of falsely declaring significant covariate effects.
More suggestions(1)
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com