<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: glimmix: dispersion estimates for small samples in Statistical Procedures</title>
    <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/glimmix-dispersion-estimates-for-small-samples/m-p/85251#M4160</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;I would go with the empirical= option for this, unless you have a lot of missing data.&amp;nbsp; If you are on SAS/STAT 12.1 or higher, consider ddfm=KR2, the improved Kenward-Rogers adjustment.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Steve Denham&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 24 Sep 2013 17:57:06 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SteveDenham</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2013-09-24T17:57:06Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>glimmix: dispersion estimates for small samples</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/glimmix-dispersion-estimates-for-small-samples/m-p/85250#M4159</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="color: #000000; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; background-color: #ffffff;"&gt;I am interested in the topic of dispersion estimates for count data coming from RNAseq data. The glimmix procedure provides the option empirical=mbn to correct for small sample size,and it appears to have good statistical properties in terms of type I error rates, however there is also the possibility to adjust the denumerator degrees of freedom for the F-tests with the KenwardRoger method. Does anybody have an idea what the best choice is? In our experiments, we typically only have 3 biological replicates for each treatment.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 Sep 2013 19:08:41 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/glimmix-dispersion-estimates-for-small-samples/m-p/85250#M4159</guid>
      <dc:creator>vstorme</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2013-09-17T19:08:41Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: glimmix: dispersion estimates for small samples</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/glimmix-dispersion-estimates-for-small-samples/m-p/85251#M4160</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;I would go with the empirical= option for this, unless you have a lot of missing data.&amp;nbsp; If you are on SAS/STAT 12.1 or higher, consider ddfm=KR2, the improved Kenward-Rogers adjustment.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Steve Denham&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Sep 2013 17:57:06 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/glimmix-dispersion-estimates-for-small-samples/m-p/85251#M4160</guid>
      <dc:creator>SteveDenham</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2013-09-24T17:57:06Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

