2023
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-29308-2
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Empirical investigations into Kruskal-Wallis power studies utilizing Bernstein fits, simulations and medical study datasets

Abstract: Bernstein fits implemented into R allow another route for Kruskal-Wallis power-study tool development. Monte-Carlo Kruskal-Wallis power studies were compared with measured power, a Monte-Carlo ANOVA equivalent and with an analytical method, with or without normalization, using four simulated runs, each with 60–100 populations (each population with N = 30,000 from a set of Pearson-type ranges): random selection gave 6300 samples analyzed for predictive power. Three medical-study datasets (Dialysis/systolic bloo… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 10 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Consequently, the total number of runs amounted to 36, with a total of 108 validations from GP. The average accuracy of validations and testing accuracy from the three split ratio executions were recorded for further analysis using the Kruskal-Wallis statistical significance test [23,24]. Figure 2 depicts the Python code for implementing TPOT, a simple and efficient GP automated machine learning tool.…”
Section: Experimental Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Consequently, the total number of runs amounted to 36, with a total of 108 validations from GP. The average accuracy of validations and testing accuracy from the three split ratio executions were recorded for further analysis using the Kruskal-Wallis statistical significance test [23,24]. Figure 2 depicts the Python code for implementing TPOT, a simple and efficient GP automated machine learning tool.…”
Section: Experimental Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The effect sizes for these (from Sobalska-Kwapis et al 14 ) were: rs1558902: beta = 0.349, 95% CI = 0.189:0.509, p = 1.93x10 − 5 ; rs1421085: beta = 0.345, 95% CI = 0.185:0.505, p = 2.42x10 − 5 ; and rs9939609: beta = 0.312, 95% CI = 0.152:0.472, p = 1.33x10 − 4 . From the actual SNP values for these three SNPs, three power estimations were performed using a Monte-Carlo Kruskal-Wallis power tool 22 (see Supplemental_File_S5) which gave estimated power of 85.5%, 86.6% and 82.1%, respectively.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The effect sizes for these (from Sobalska-Kwapis et al 14 ) were: rs1558902: beta = 0.349, 95% CI 0.189:0.509, p = 1.93 × 10 –5 ; rs1421085: beta = 0.345, 95% CI 0.185:0.505, p = 2.42 × 10 –5 ; and rs9939609: beta = 0.312, 95% CI 0.152:0.472, p = 1.33 × 10 –4 . From the actual SNP values for these three SNPs, three power estimations were performed using our Monte-Carlo Kruskal–Wallis power tool 22 (see Supplementary File S5 ) which gave estimated power of 85.5%, 86.6% and 82.1%, respectively.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%