Re: st: Bonferroni-holm

[William Buchanan <william@williambuchanan.net>]

Hi Sadjad,

As stated in the FAQ, you are instructed to provide full references to material when referencing anything.  Additionally, the correction methods used in neuroimaging analyses are likely to differ to some degree compared with those used in social sciences, since it is much less likely that someone in the social sciences would be working with several tens of thousands of dependent variables simultaneously.  Most software for neuroimaging analyses will have built in support for these corrections (at least Brain Voyager does).  It would be helpful to provide more explicit detail to the list if you would like any reasonable advice.

HTH,
Billy

Sent from my iPhone

On Aug 19, 2012, at 6:33, Sadjad Riahi <sadjad.riahi@gmail.com> wrote:

> dear statalist,
> I have found In a paper with the similar methodology with ours that
> for correction of multiple comparisons, authors have applied
> bonferroni-holm correction. To explain the analysis in short, they
> have several dependent variable (subcorticalgray matter  region
> volumes) and three groups of diagnosis, intracranial volumes,age and
> sex as predictor variables.they have fitted a GLM for each region
> volume as the dependant variable seperately, then F test was preformed
> and subsequently contrast analysis. but for multiple comparison they
> first corrected for the omnibus test and then correction for pairwise
> comparison for each GLM that survived the first round of correction
> was performed. Can you please enlighten me with this correction
> procedure more in detail.
> 
> yours,
> 
> Sadjjad Riahi
> *
> *   For searches and help try:
> *   http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search
> *   http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
> *   http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/

*
*   For searches and help try:
*   http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search
*   http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
*   http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/