Loading publication...

Noodle always counts identifier-free feature events for service operation. With your permission, Google Analytics can also estimate audience and engagement. Search text, publication identifiers, cookies, IP addresses and browser fingerprints are never included in Noodle's first-party event counters.

Privacy details

Article

Assessing the probability that a positive report is false: an approach for molecular epidemiology studies.

Journal of the National Cancer Institute - 17 Mar 2004

Wacholder Sholom, Chanock Stephen, Garcia-Closas Montserrat, El Ghormli Laure, Rothman Nathaniel

Abstract excerpt

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 f...

Read the complete abstract on PubMed

Topics

Share this publication in a Topic to start or enrich a Post.

Share to Bayes Theorem
Share to Confidence Intervals
Share to Confounding Factors, Epidemiologic

Methodology Data sources Editorial policy Privacy About Contact Helena Bioinformatics

Share to False Positive Reactions

Share to Likelihood Functions

Share to Mathematical Computing

Share to Observer Variation

Share to Sample Size

Source

Open in PubMed Open full text

Identifiers

PMID: 15026468
DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djh075
PMCID: PMC7713993

Provenance

PubMed metadata and Literature Corpus relationships. Corpus snapshot updated 1 Sept 2026. Prepared record publication-15026468-2026-09-01.1. Manifest publication-graph-cohort-2026-09-01.1.

Source receipt: PubMed via Helena Literature Corpus, retrieved 1 Sept 2026.

Related research

Semantic proximity does not establish scientific evidence.

Research trail→

Click a neighbor to travelStep 1 · 12 closest

Assessing the probability that a positive report is false: an approach for molecular epidemiology studies.PMID 15026468Read ↗

The False-positive to False-negative Ratio in Epidemiologic StudiesSemantic proximity Read ↗

A critique of the false-positive report probability.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Reporting genomic secondary findings: ACMG members weigh inSemantic proximity Read ↗

Invited Commentary on "My Research Results: a program to facilitate return of clinically actionable genomic research findings" by Willis et al.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Reporting and interpretation in genome-wide association studies.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Molecular pathological epidemiology gives clues to paradoxical findingsSemantic proximity Read ↗

No expectation to share incidental findings in genomic researchSemantic proximity Read ↗

Effect of formal statistical significance on the credibility of observational associations.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Large numbers of individuals are required to classify and define risk for rare variants in known cancer risk genes.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Point-counterpoint. Ethics and genomic incidental findings.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Disclosing pathogenic genetic variants to research participants: quantifying an emerging ethical responsibility.Semantic proximity Read ↗

On the synthesis and interpretation of consistent but weak gene-disease associations in the era of genome-wide association studiesSemantic proximity Read ↗

⌁Select a neighboring publication to make it the new centre.