Cited by 1,073Gene expression and cancer classificationStatistical Distribution Estimation and ApplicationsProbability and Statistical Research

Small-sample estimation of negative binomial dispersion, with applications to SAGE data

Robinson, M. D., Smyth, G. K.·2007·Biostatistics

Abstract

We derive a quantile-adjusted conditional maximum likelihood estimator for the dispersion parameter of the negative binomial distribution and compare its performance, in terms of bias, to various other methods. Our estimation scheme outperforms all other methods in very small samples, typical of those from serial analysis of gene expression studies, the motivating data for this study. The impact of dispersion estimation on hypothesis testing is studied. We derive an "exact" test that outperforms the standard approximate asymptotic tests.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/biostatistics/kxm030

Cites

12 of 12 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The quasi-likelihood framework in edgeR was used to handle the pronounced variability of single-cell expression states.

    “and the quasi-likelihood framework within edgeR to handle the pronounced variability of the single cell expression states.”
  • A negative binomial model in edgeR was used to account for the sparse single-cell count matrix.

    “We used the negative binomial (NB) model implemented in edgeR (3.10.0)79–83 for our single cell differential expression analysis to explicitly account for the sparse count matrix”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Robinson, M. D., & Smyth, G. K.
Affiliations
  • The University of Melbourne (AU)
  • Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research (AU)
Corresponding author
Robinson, M. D.
Venue
Biostatistics
Published
2007-07-11
Volume
9
Issue
2
Pages
321-332
ISSN
  • 1465-4644 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-4357
OpenAlex
W2141425631
Cited by
1,073
References
12
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 34 · 2024: 43 · 2023: 66 · 2022: 60 · 2021: 71 · 2020: 75 · 2019: 91 · 2018: 117 · 2017: 105 · 2016: 87 · 2015: 83 · 2014: 80 · 2013: 60 · 2012: 38
FWCI
2.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Biostatistics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Medical Research Council
  • National Health and Medical Research Council (406657)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gene expression and cancer classification
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Distribution Estimation and Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Probability and Statistical Research
Keywords
small sample estimation, serial analysis of gene expression, bias, hypothesis testing, exact tests, count data
MeSH terms
Biometry, Humans, Regression Analysis, Research Design, RNA, Messenger, Stochastic Processes, Weights and Measures, Gene Library, Bias, Binomial Distribution, Likelihood Functions, Information Storage and Retrieval, Sample Size, Expressed Sequence Tags, Gene Expression Profiling

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review