Question: Adjusted P-value in GO analysis
0
gravatar for DNA
3 months ago by
DNA0
DNA0 wrote:

Hi!

I am doing GO analysis using software such as EnrichR, and all results come out with good P values but the adjusted P values are around 0.5 or even around 1. Is it a glitch or it is expected to be like this, and are the results then statistically significant?

Thanks!

go gene ontology p value • 361 views
ADD COMMENTlink modified 3 months ago by EagleEye5.0k • written 3 months ago by DNA0
0
gravatar for Philipp Bayer
3 months ago by
Philipp Bayer5.4k
Australia/Perth/UWA
Philipp Bayer5.4k wrote:

Since a GO enrichment analysis runs many, many, many tests (either one test for each gene or one test for each GO-term, can't remember) just by chance alone you would expect to see terms that seemingly have a significant p-value

Let's say you set your p-value cutoff of 0.05. You run one test and your p-value is below 0.05, nothing of significance. You keep on repeating tests, by test 20 you have a significant p-value, hooray! However, with a p-value cutoff of 0.05, you expect to see one significant test purely by chance after 20 tests (20*0.05 = 1). See slide 4 here for another example.

That's why software that runs many many tests runs multiple test correction to get around this problem, it adjusts the p-values based on the number of tests you ran (~the size of your input dataset).

In your case I would ignore the column of the unadjusted p-value and just look at the adjusted p-values, if they're not <0.05 there then they are not significant.

ADD COMMENTlink written 3 months ago by Philipp Bayer5.4k
0
gravatar for theobroma22
3 months ago by
theobroma221.1k
theobroma221.1k wrote:

You can use the P-value...although the change is not really expected as it’s dependent on the mathematics underlying the adj. p-value calculation. Essentially, you should’ve, well based on Bayes, defined your cut-off value prior to doing the calculation. Anyway, if you should be required to use the adj. p-value, then typically the 0.05 is the standard cut-off. Using this metric assures there are less false positives compare to the P-value.

ADD COMMENTlink written 3 months ago by theobroma221.1k
0
gravatar for EagleEye
3 months ago by
EagleEye5.0k
Sweden
EagleEye5.0k wrote:

Though what Philipp Bayer saying is true, the p-value metric is still used to filter the enriched process. In addition to that I would also recommend you to consider filtering by percentage of genes covered from particular pathway/biologicalProcess by your input list.

If you cannot find the information (% genes covered in pathway) from EnrichR, try GeneSCF.

A: GeneSCF and P-value Benjamini and Hochberg (FDR)

ADD COMMENTlink modified 3 months ago • written 3 months ago by EagleEye5.0k
Please log in to add an answer.

Help
Access

Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy.
Powered by Biostar version 2.3.0
Traffic: 1026 users visited in the last hour