IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/biomet/v98y2011i2p391-401.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The union closure method for testing a fixed sequence of families of hypotheses

Author

Listed:
  • Han-Joo Kim
  • A. Richard Entsuah
  • Justine Shults

Abstract

Statistical analyses often involve testing multiple hypotheses that are naturally grouped into a fixed sequence of families. An effective approach to control the familywise error rate is to prioritize the importance of prespecification in the testing order. A gatekeeping testing procedure examines the first family with no multiple adjustment and then examines the subsequent family depending on the decision made with respect to the previous one. In this paper, we describe the union closure method that can be used to design gatekeeping procedures. A bipolar disorder trial with three primary and two secondary outcomes is presented as an example. Power comparisons based on the bipolar disorder trial show that the proposed gatekeeping procedures under the union closure framework are more powerful than competing methods. Copyright 2011, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Han-Joo Kim & A. Richard Entsuah & Justine Shults, 2011. "The union closure method for testing a fixed sequence of families of hypotheses," Biometrika, Biometrika Trust, vol. 98(2), pages 391-401.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:biomet:v:98:y:2011:i:2:p:391-401
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/biomet/asr015
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Biao Wu & Yuejian Peng, 2018. "Two extremal problems related to orders," Journal of Combinatorial Optimization, Springer, vol. 35(2), pages 588-612, February.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:biomet:v:98:y:2011:i:2:p:391-401. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/biomet .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.