Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42222501›Full record

ArticlePeerJ2026

False discovery rate control for grouped hypotheses: application to miRNAome data.

Nilanjana Laha, Salil Koner, Austin Labowitz, Navonil De Sarkar

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PeerJ, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Nilanjana LahaDepartment of Statistics, Texas A&M University, College Station, United States of America.
Salil KonerDepartment of Statistics, University of California, Riverside, United States of America.
Austin LabowitzDepartment of Statistics, Texas A&M University, College Station, United States of America.
Navonil De SarkarDepartment of Pathology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bioinformatics studies often involve numerous simultaneous statistical tests, increasing the risk of false discoveries. To control the false discovery rate (FDR), these studies typically apply a statistical method called the Benjamini-Hochberg (BH) method. However, BH can be overly conservative, particularly in small-sample studies, and it does not take advantage of relevant structural information among the hypotheses, such as groupings. Group structures can arise, for example, when genomic features located in close proximity are co-regulated. Recent statistical developments have yielded group-adaptive BH methods that can leverage pre-existing group information to improve statistical power while maintaining FDR control. However, these methods remain underutilized in bioinformatics practice. In this study, we illustrate the practical application of group-adaptive BH methods using a previously published, moderately scaled microRNA (miRNA) dataset. Even under simple groupings based on chromosomal location, these methods identified more miRNAs with significantly deregulated expression (FDR-adjusted

Indexed as

Computational BiologyMicroRNAsGene Expression ProfilingHumansMicroRNAsBenjamini Hochberg methodFalse discovery rateGrouped Benjamini HochbergMiRNA deregulationMultiple hypothesis testingOral squamous cell carcinoma

Identifiers

PMID42222501
PMCPMC13218340

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.