Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Analysis of the Effect of Multiple Testing in Assessing Tobacco Product Differences Cover

Analysis of the Effect of Multiple Testing in Assessing Tobacco Product Differences

Open Access
|May 2017

References

  1. 1. Health Canada: Tobacco Reporting Regulations SOR/2000-273; 2000. Available at: http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/SOR-2000-273/ (accessed April 2017).
  2. 2. Venezuela Ministry of Health & Social Development: Regulation and Control of Cigarette & Other Derivative Tobacco for Human Consumption; 2004.
  3. 3. Brazilian National Health Surveillance Agency: RDC No. 90 and its Amendment; 2007. Available at: http://www.tobaccocontrollaws.org/legislation/country/brazil/laws (accessed April 2017).
  4. 4. Taiwan Department of Health: Regulations Governing Reporting of Tobacco Product Information under the Tobacco Hazards Prevention & Control Act (THPCA); 2007.
  5. 5. FDA: Draft Guidance; Reporting Harmful and Potentially Harmful Constituents in Tobacco Products and Tobacco Smoke Under Section 904(a)(3) of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act; 2012. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/downloads/TobaccoProducts/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/UCM297828.pdf (accessed April 2017).
  6. 6. World Health Organization (WHO): The Scientific Basis of Tobacco Product Regulation, Second Report of a WHO Study Group (TobReg); WHO technical report series No. 951, WHO Press, Geneva, Switzerland, 2008. Available at: http://www.who.int/tobacco/global_interaction/tobreg/publications/9789241209519.pdf (accessed April 2017).
  7. 7. World Health Organization - WHO Study Group on Tobacco Product Regulation: The Scientific Basis of Tobacco Product Regulation, Fifth Report of a WHO Study Group (TobReg); WHO Technical report series; 989, WHO Press, Geneva, Switzerland, 2015. Available at: http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/161512/1/9789241209892.pdf?ua=1&ua=1 (accessed April 2017).
  8. 8. Purkis, S.: Letter to the Editor: Analysis of the Data Variability in the Australian Benchmark Study 2000 - 2001; 2009. Available at https://www.degruyter.com/view/j/cttr.2009.23.issue-5/cttr-2013-0867/cttr-2013-0867.xml (accessed April 2017). DOI: 10.2478/cttr-2013-086710.2478/cttr-2013-0867
  9. 9. Hyodo, T., K. Minagawa, T. Inoue, J. Fujimoto, N. Minami, R. Bito, and A. Mikita: Estimation of Mouth Level Exposure to Smoke Constituents of Cigarettes with Different Tar Levels Using Filter Analysis; Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 67 (2013) 486–498. DOI: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2013.09.00910.1016/j.yrtph.2013.09.00924113618
  10. 10. Purkis, S.W., M. Meger, and R. Wuttke: A Review of Current Smoke Constituent Measurement Activities and Aspects of Yield Variability; Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 62 (2012) 202–213. DOI: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2011.10.00610.1016/j.yrtph.2011.10.00622019550
  11. 11. Eldridge, A., T.R. Betson, M.V. Gama, and K. McAdam: Variation in Tobacco and Mainstream Smoke Toxicant Yields from Selected Commercial Cigarette Products; Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 71 (2015) 409–427. DOI: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2015.01.00610.1016/j.yrtph.2015.01.00625620723
  12. 12. Belushkin, M., G. Jaccard, and A. Kondylis: Considerations for Comparative Tobacco Product Assessments Based on Smoke Constituent Yields; Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 73 (2015) 105–113.10.1016/j.yrtph.2015.06.017
  13. 13. International Organization for Standardization (ISO): ISO 5725-6:1994/Cor 1:2001 - Accuracy (Trueness and Precision) of Measurement Methods and Results – Part 6: Use in Practice of Accuracy Values – Technical Corrigendum 1; ISO, Geneva, Switzerland, 2001.
  14. 14. Teillet, B., X. Cahours, T. Verron, S. Colard, and S.W. Purkis: Comparison of Smoke Yield Data Collected from Different Laboratories; Beitr. Tabakforsch. Int. 25 (2013) 662–670. DOI: 10.2478/cttr-2013-094310.2478/cttr-2013-0943
  15. 15. Bland, J. M. and D. G. Altman: Multiple Significance Tests: The Bonferroni Method; Brit. Med. J. 310 (1995) 170. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.310.6973.17010.1136/bmj.310.6973.17025485617833759
  16. 16. Holm, S.: A Simple Sequentially Rejective Multiple Test Procedure; Scand. J. Statist. 6 (1979) 65–70.
  17. 17. Levin, B.: On the Holm, Simes, and Hochberg Multiple Test Procedures; Am. J. Public Health 86 (1996) 628–629.10.2105/AJPH.86.5.628
  18. 18. Aickin, M. and H. Gensler: Adjusting for Multiple Testing When Reporting Research Results: The Bonferroni vs. Holm Methods; Am. J. Public Health 86 (1996) 726–728.10.2105/AJPH.86.5.726
  19. 19. Benjamini, Y. and Y. Hochberg: Controlling the False Discovery Rate: A Practical and Powerful Approach to Multiple Testing; J. Royal Statist. Soc. B 57 (1995) 289–300.10.1111/j.2517-6161.1995.tb02031.x
  20. 20. Benjamini, Y. and D. Yekutieli: The Control of the False Discovery Rate in Multiple Testing Under Dependency; Ann. Statist. 29 (2001) 1165–1188.10.1214/aos/1013699998
Language: English
Page range: 78 - 85
Submitted on: Nov 22, 2016
Accepted on: Mar 30, 2017
Published on: May 22, 2017
Published by: Institut für Tabakforschung GmbH
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 4 issues per year

© 2017 Thomas Verron, Xavier Cahours, Stéphane Colard, published by Institut für Tabakforschung GmbH
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.