Assessing the Probability That a Positive Report is False: An Approach for Molecular Epidemiology Studies
Top Cited Papers
Open Access
- 17 March 2004
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Oxford University Press (OUP) in JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute
- Vol. 96 (6) , 434-442
- https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djh075
Abstract
Too many reports of associations between genetic variants and common cancer sites and other complex diseases are false positives. A major reason for this unfortunate situation is the strategy of declaring statistical significance based on a P value alone, particularly, any P value below .05. The false positive report probability (FPRP), the probability of no true association between a genetic variant and disease given a statistically significant finding, depends not only on the observed P value but also on both the prior probability that the association between the genetic variant and the disease is real and the statistical power of the test. In this commentary, we show how to assess the FPRP and how to use it to decide whether a finding is deserving of attention or “noteworthy.” We show how this approach can lead to improvements in the design, analysis, and interpretation of molecular epidemiology studies. Our proposal can help investigators, editors, and readers of research articles to protect themselves from overinterpreting statistically significant findings that are not likely to signify a true association. An FPRP-based criterion for deciding whether to call a finding noteworthy formalizes the process already used informally by investigators—that is, tempering enthusiasm for remarkable study findings with considerations of plausibility.Keywords
This publication has 30 references indexed in Scilit:
- Discovering genotypes underlying human phenotypes: past successes for mendelian disease, future approaches for complex diseaseNature Genetics, 2003
- Synonymous mutations in the human dopamine receptor D2 (DRD2) affect mRNA stability and synthesis of the receptorHuman Molecular Genetics, 2003
- Meta-analysis of genetic association studies supports a contribution of common variants to susceptibility to common diseaseNature Genetics, 2003
- Empirical bayes methods and false discovery rates for microarraysGenetic Epidemiology, 2002
- It’s Time to Rehabilitate the P-ValueEpidemiology, 2001
- Sifting the evidence---what's wrong with significance tests? Another comment on the role of statistical methodsBMJ, 2001
- The Future of Genetic Studies of Complex Human DiseasesScience, 1996
- No Adjustments Are Needed for Multiple ComparisonsEpidemiology, 1990
- Are all significant P values created equal? The analogy between diagnostic tests and clinical researchPublished by American Medical Association (AMA) ,1987
- Belief in the law of small numbers.Psychological Bulletin, 1971