Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comments on: Hierarchical inference for genome-wide association studies: a view on methodology with software

  • Discussion
  • Published:
Computational Statistics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

A Rejoinder to this article was published on 08 January 2020

The Original Article was published on 06 January 2020

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Benjamini Y, Heller R (2008) Screening for partial conjunction hypotheses. Biometrics 64:1215–1222

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Benjamini Y, Hochberg Y (1995) Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. J R Stat Soc Ser B (Methodol) 57:289–300

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Benner C, Havulinna AS, Jarvelin M-R, Salomaa V, Ripatti S, Pirinen M (2017) Prospects of fine-mapping trait-associated genomic regions by using summary statistics from genome-wide association studies. Am J Hum Genet 101(4):539–551

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heller R, Yekutieli D (2014) Replicability analysis for genome-wide association studies. Ann Appl Stat 8(1):481–498

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Heller R, Meir A, Chatterjee N (2019) Post-selection estimation and testing following aggregate association tests. J R Stat Soc Ser B (Stat Methodol) 81(3):547–573

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Katsevich E, Sabatti C, Bogomolov M (2018) Controlling FDR while highlighting selected discoveries. arXiv:1809.01792

  • Lee JD, Taylor JE (2014) Exact post model selection inference for marginal screening. In: Ghahramani Z, Welling M, Cortes C, Lawrence ND, Weinberger KQ (eds) Advances in neural information processing systems 27 (NIPS 2014), volume 27 of advances in neural information processing systems. 28th Conference on neural information processing systems (NIPS), Montreal, Dec 08–13, 2014

  • Lee JD, Sun DL, Sun Y, Taylor JE (2016) Exact post-selection inference, with application to the lasso. Ann Stat 44(3):907–927

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Loftus J, Taylor E (2015) Selective inference in regression models with groups of variables. arXiv:1511.01478 [stat.ME]

  • Meijer R, Goeman J (2015) Multiple testing of gene sets from gene ontology: possibilities and pitfalls. Brief Bioinform 17(5):808–818

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sesia M, Sabatti C, Candes EJ (2019) Rejoinder: “Gene hunting with hidden Markov model knockoffs”. Biometrika 106(1):35–45

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Yekutieli Y (2008) Hierarchical false discovery rate-controlling methodology. J Am Stat Assoc 103(481):309–316

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Statistics and Operations Research, Tel-Aviv University, Tel Aviv, 6997801, Israel

    Ruth Heller

Authors
  1. Ruth Heller
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ruth Heller.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This comment refers to the invited paper available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00180-019-00939-2

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Heller, R. Comments on: Hierarchical inference for genome-wide association studies: a view on methodology with software. Comput Stat 35, 51–55 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00180-019-00942-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00180-019-00942-7

Search

Navigation