IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jnlasa/v114y2019i525p158-168.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Admissibility in Partial Conjunction Testing

Author

Listed:
  • Jingshu Wang
  • Art B. Owen

Abstract

Meta-analysis combines results from multiple studies aiming to increase power in finding their common effect. It would typically reject the null hypothesis of no effect if any one of the studies shows strong significance. The partial conjunction null hypothesis is rejected only when at least r of n component hypotheses are nonnull with r = 1 corresponding to a usual meta-analysis. Compared with meta-analysis, it can encourage replicable findings across studies. A by-product of it when applied to different r values is a confidence interval of r quantifying the proportion of nonnull studies. Benjamini and Heller (2008) provided a valid test for the partial conjunction null by ignoring the r − 1 smallest p-values and applying a valid meta-analysis p-value to the remaining n − r + 1 p-values. We provide sufficient and necessary conditions of admissible combined p-value for the partial conjunction hypothesis among monotone tests. Non-monotone tests always dominate monotone tests but are usually too unreasonable to be used in practice. Based on these findings, we propose a generalized form of Benjamini and Heller’s test which allows usage of various types of meta-analysis p-values, and apply our method to an example in assessing replicable benefit of new anticoagulants across subgroups of patients for stroke prevention.

Suggested Citation

  • Jingshu Wang & Art B. Owen, 2019. "Admissibility in Partial Conjunction Testing," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 114(525), pages 158-168, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:jnlasa:v:114:y:2019:i:525:p:158-168
    DOI: 10.1080/01621459.2017.1385465
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/01621459.2017.1385465
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/01621459.2017.1385465?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

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

    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:taf:jnlasa:v:114:y:2019:i:525:p:158-168. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/UASA20 .

    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.