Search anything and hit enter
  • Teams
  • Members
  • Projects
  • Events
  • Calls
  • Jobs
  • publications
  • Software
  • Tools
  • Network
  • Equipment

A little guide for advanced search:

  • Tip 1. You can use quotes "" to search for an exact expression.
    Example: "cell division"
  • Tip 2. You can use + symbol to restrict results containing all words.
    Example: +cell +stem
  • Tip 3. You can use + and - symbols to force inclusion or exclusion of specific words.
    Example: +cell -stem
e.g. searching for members in projects tagged cancer
Search for
Count
IN
OUT
Content 1
  • member
  • team
  • department
  • center
  • program_project
  • nrc
  • whocc
  • project
  • software
  • tool
  • patent
  • Administrative Staff
  • Assistant Professor
  • Associate Professor
  • Clinical Research Assistant
  • Clinical Research Nurse
  • Clinician Researcher
  • Department Manager
  • Dual-education Student
  • Full Professor
  • Honorary Professor
  • Lab assistant
  • Master Student
  • Non-permanent Researcher
  • Nursing Staff
  • Permanent Researcher
  • Pharmacist
  • PhD Student
  • Physician
  • Post-doc
  • Prize
  • Project Manager
  • Research Associate
  • Research Engineer
  • Retired scientist
  • Technician
  • Undergraduate Student
  • Veterinary
  • Visiting Scientist
  • Deputy Director of Center
  • Deputy Director of Department
  • Deputy Director of National Reference Center
  • Deputy Head of Facility
  • Director of Center
  • Director of Department
  • Director of Institute
  • Director of National Reference Center
  • Group Leader
  • Head of Facility
  • Head of Operations
  • Head of Structure
  • Honorary President of the Departement
  • Labex Coordinator
Content 2
  • member
  • team
  • department
  • center
  • program_project
  • nrc
  • whocc
  • project
  • software
  • tool
  • patent
  • Administrative Staff
  • Assistant Professor
  • Associate Professor
  • Clinical Research Assistant
  • Clinical Research Nurse
  • Clinician Researcher
  • Department Manager
  • Dual-education Student
  • Full Professor
  • Honorary Professor
  • Lab assistant
  • Master Student
  • Non-permanent Researcher
  • Nursing Staff
  • Permanent Researcher
  • Pharmacist
  • PhD Student
  • Physician
  • Post-doc
  • Prize
  • Project Manager
  • Research Associate
  • Research Engineer
  • Retired scientist
  • Technician
  • Undergraduate Student
  • Veterinary
  • Visiting Scientist
  • Deputy Director of Center
  • Deputy Director of Department
  • Deputy Director of National Reference Center
  • Deputy Head of Facility
  • Director of Center
  • Director of Department
  • Director of Institute
  • Director of National Reference Center
  • Group Leader
  • Head of Facility
  • Head of Operations
  • Head of Structure
  • Honorary President of the Departement
  • Labex Coordinator
Search
Go back
Scroll to top
Share
© Research
Scientific Fields
Diseases
Organisms
Applications
Technique

Published in Genetics - 01 Apr 2019

Dahl A, Guillemot V, Mefford J, Aschard H, Zaitlen N,

Link to Pubmed [PMID] – 30692194

Link to DOI – 10.1534/genetics.118.301768

Genetics 2019 Apr; 211(4): 1179-1189

High-throughput measurements of molecular phenotypes provide an unprecedented opportunity to model cellular processes and their impact on disease. These highly structured datasets are usually strongly confounded, creating false positives and reducing power. This has motivated many approaches based on principal components analysis (PCA) to estimate and correct for confounders, which have become indispensable elements of association tests between molecular phenotypes and both genetic and nongenetic factors. Here, we show that these correction approaches induce a bias, and that it persists for large sample sizes and replicates out-of-sample. We prove this theoretically for PCA by deriving an analytic, deterministic, and intuitive bias approximation. We assess other methods with realistic simulations, which show that perturbing any of several basic parameters can cause false positive rate (FPR) inflation. Our experiments show the bias depends on covariate and confounder sparsity, effect sizes, and their correlation. Surprisingly, when the covariate and confounder have [Formula: see text], standard two-step methods all have [Formula: see text]-fold FPR inflation. Our analysis informs best practices for confounder correction in genomic studies, and suggests many false discoveries have been made and replicated in some differential expression analyses.