Abstract
This paper revisits a meta-analysis method proposed by Pearson [Biometrika 26 (1934) 425–442] and first used by David [Biometrika 26 (1934) 1–11]. It was thought to be inadmissible for over fifty years, dating back to a paper of Birnbaum [J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 49 (1954) 559–574]. It turns out that the method Birnbaum analyzed is not the one that Pearson proposed. We show that Pearson’s proposal is admissible. Because it is admissible, it has better power than the standard test of Fisher [Statistical Methods for Research Workers (1932) Oliver and Boyd] at some alternatives, and worse power at others. Pearson’s method has the advantage when all or most of the nonzero parameters share the same sign. Pearson’s test has proved useful in a genomic setting, screening for age-related genes. This paper also presents an FFT-based method for getting hard upper and lower bounds on the CDF of a sum of nonnegative random variables.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
