CORRESPONDENCE

Re: Assessing the Probability That a Positive Report is False: An Approach for Molecular Epidemiology Studies

Hans-Hermann Dubben

Correspondence to: Hans-Hermann Dubben, PhD, Institute of General Practice, University of Hamburg, Martinistrasse 52, 20246 Hamburg, Germany (e-mail: dubben{at}uke.uni-hamburg.de)

I read with great interest the very comprehensible commentary by Wacholder et al. (1) and share the authors' interpretation of statistical significance. However, I cannot duplicate their calculation leading to their figure 5, in which higher statistical power is associated with a higher false-positive report probability (FPRP). It is my understanding that higher statistical power results in a lower FPRP. I therefore assume that something is wrong in that figure.

REFERENCE

1 Wacholder S, Chanock S, Garcia-Closas M, El Ghormli L, Rothman N. Assessing the probability that a positive report is false: an approach for molecular epidemiology studies. J Natl Cancer Inst 2004;96:434–42.[Abstract/Free Full Text]



Response to this Correspondence

             
Copyright © 2004 Oxford University Press (unless otherwise stated)
Oxford University Press Privacy Policy and Legal Statement