Convexity issues in multivariate multiple testing of treatments vs. control. (English) Zbl 1328.62350
Summary: The problem of multiple testing of each of several treatment mean vectors versus a control mean vector is considered. Both one-sided and two-sided alternatives are treated. It is shown that typical choices for marginal test procedures will lead to step-down procedures that do not have convex acceptance regions. This lack of convexity has both intuitive and theoretical disadvantages. The only exception being linear tests in the one-sided problem. Although such a procedure is atypical, it not only has convex acceptance regions but is such that critical values are obtainable so that the overall procedure can control FDR or FWER.
For both one-sided and two-sided alternatives, two other stepwise multiple testing methods are presented that do have convex acceptance regions.
For both one-sided and two-sided alternatives, two other stepwise multiple testing methods are presented that do have convex acceptance regions.
MSC:
| 62H15 | Hypothesis testing in multivariate analysis |
| 62F03 | Parametric hypothesis testing |
| 62C05 | General considerations in statistical decision theory |
Keywords:
convex acceptance region; co-primary endpoints; positive regression dependence; false discovery rate; familywise error rate; step-down procedureReferences:
| [2] | Cohen, A.; Ma, Y.; Sackrowitz, H. B., Individualized 2-stage multiple testing procedures with corresponding interval estimates, Biom. J., 55, 386-401 (2013) · Zbl 1441.62314 |
| [3] | Cohen, A.; Sackrowitz, H. B., Decision theory results for multiple endpoint procedures, Ann. Statist., 33, 126-144 (2005) · Zbl 1066.62009 |
| [4] | Cohen, A.; Sackrowitz, H. B., Multiple testing of two-sided alternatives with dependent data, Statist. Sinica, 18, 1593-1602 (2008) · Zbl 1149.62009 |
| [5] | Cohen, A.; Sackrowitz, H. B.; Xu, M., The use of an identity in Anderson for multivariate testing, JSPI, 37, 2615-2621 (2008) · Zbl 1137.62038 |
| [6] | Cohen, A.; Sackrowitz, H. B.; Xu, M., A new multiple testing method in the dependent case, Ann. Statist., 37, 1518-1544 (2009) · Zbl 1161.62040 |
| [7] | Holm, S., A simple sequentially rejective multiple test procedure, Scand. J. Statist., 6, 65-70 (1979) · Zbl 0402.62058 |
| [8] | Imada, T.; Douke, H., Step down procedure for comparing several treatments with a control based on multivariate normal response, Biom. J., 49, 18-29 (2007) · Zbl 1442.62426 |
| [9] | Lehmann, E. L.; Romano, J. P., Testing Statistical Hypotheses (2005), Springer · Zbl 1076.62018 |
| [11] | Matthes, T. K.; Truax, D. R., Tests of composite hypotheses for the multivariate exponential family, Ann. Math. Statist., 38, 681-697 (1967) · Zbl 0152.17802 |
| [12] | O’Brien, P. C., Procedures for comparing samples with multiple endpoints, Biometrics, 40, 1079-1087 (1984) |
| [13] | Rockafellar, R. T., Convex Analysis (1972), Princeton University Press: Princeton University Press Princeton, NJ · Zbl 0224.49003 |
| [14] | Sarkar, S. K., Some results on false discovery rate in stepwise multiple testing procedures, Ann. Statist., 30, 239-257 (2002) · Zbl 1101.62349 |
| [15] | Silvapulle, M. J.; Sen, P. K., Constrained Statistical Inference (2005), Wiley: Wiley NJ · Zbl 1077.62019 |
This reference list is based on information provided by the publisher or from digital mathematics libraries. Its items are heuristically matched to zbMATH identifiers and may contain data conversion errors. In some cases that data have been complemented/enhanced by data from zbMATH Open. This attempts to reflect the references listed in the original paper as accurately as possible without claiming completeness or a perfect matching.
