Table 4 |
|||||||
Results for the simulation study for the case of having polymorphic CNVs | |||||||
Bayesian Shared Model | |||||||
Multinomial | Posterior | Normal | Posterior | ||||
# SNPs | χ^{2} | K-W | regression | Distribution | Approximation | Probability | |
moderate risk scenario (OR=2.0) | |||||||
TPR | 2000 | 48.50 | 0 | 52.25 | 75.25 | 74.25 | 75.50 |
TNR | 2000 | 100.00 | 100 | 100.00 | 100.00 | 100.00 | 100.00 |
TPR | 500 | 46.25 | 0 | 42.50 | 64.50 | 64.75 | 64.25 |
TNR | 500 | 100.00 | 100 | 100.00 | 100.00 | 100.00 | 100.00 |
moderate risk scenario (OR=1.5) | |||||||
TPR | 2000 | 30.25 | 0 | 35.45 | 58.50 | 58.50 | 57.75 |
TNR | 2000 | 100.00 | 100 | 100.00 | 99.98 | 99.99 | 99.97 |
TPR | 500 | 20.50 | 0 | 23.25 | 44.25 | 44.25 | 44.50 |
TNR | 500 | 99.99 | 100 | 99.99 | 99.96 | 99.96 | 99.94 |
low risk scenario (OR=1.2) | |||||||
TPR | 2000 | 0.70 | 0 | 0.70 | 20.25 | 20.25 | 20.75 |
TNR | 2000 | 99.98 | 100 | 99.99 | 99.97 | 99.99 | 99.98 |
TPR | 500 | 0.50 | 0 | 0.50 | 16.25 | 16.25 | 15.75 |
TNR | 500 | 99.99 | 100 | 99.99 | 99.99 | 99.99 | 99.98 |
Results for the simulation described in Simulation Studies Section for the case of having polymorphic CNVs with major allele frequency simulated from U(0.01, 0.1). The different scenarios are described in that section. We compare four different approaches: χ^{2} test, Kruskall-Wallis (K-W), Multinomial regression using likelihood ratio test, and our proposed Bayesian model. The comparison was based on computing the True Positive and Negative Rates, TPR and TNR respectively. Results are expressed in %.
González et al.
González et al. BMC Bioinformatics 2012 13:130 doi:10.1186/1471-2105-13-130