Of mice and men: Sparse statistical modeling in cardiovascular genomics

In high-throughput genomics, large-scale designed experiments are becoming common, and analysis approaches based on highly multivariate regression and anova concepts are key tools. Shrinkage models of one form or another can provide comprehensive approaches to the problems of simultaneous inference that involve implicit multiple comparisons over the many, many parameters representing effects of design factors and covariates. We use such approaches here in a study of cardiovascular genomics. The primary experimental context concerns a carefully designed, and rich, gene expression study focused on gene-environment interactions, with the goals of identifying genes implicated in connection with disease states and known risk factors, and in generating expression signatures as proxies for such risk factors. A coupled exploratory analysis investigates cross-species extrapolation of gene expression signatures--how these mouse-model signatures translate to humans. The latter involves exploration of sparse latent factor analysis of human observational data and of how it relates to projected risk signatures derived in the animal models. The study also highlights a range of applied statistical and genomic data analysis issues, including model specification, computational questions and model-based correction of experimental artifacts in DNA microarray data.Comment: Published at http://dx.doi.org/10.1214/07-AOAS110 in the Annals of Applied Statistics (http://www.imstat.org/aoas/) by the Institute of Mathematical Statistics (http://www.imstat.org

Employment Discrimination Plaintiffs in Federal Court: From Bad to Worse?

This Article utilizes the Administrative Office\u27s data to convey the realities of federal employment discrimination litigation. Litigants in these jobs cases appeal more often than other litigants, with the defendants doing far better on those appeals than the plaintiffs. These troublesome facts help explain why today fewer plaintiffs are undertaking the frustrating route into federal district court, where plaintiffs must pursue their claims relatively often all the way through trial and where at both pretrial and trial these plaintiffs lose unusually often

How Employment Discrimination Plaintiffs Fare in Federal Court

This article presents the full range of information that the Administrative Office’s data convey on federal employment discrimination litigation. From that information, the authors tell three stories about (1) bringing these claims, (2) their outcome in the district court, and (3) the effect of appeal. Each of these stories is a sad one for employment discrimination plaintiffs: relatively often, the numerous plaintiffs must pursue their claims all the way through trial, which is usually a jury trial; at both pretrial and trial these plaintiffs lose disproportionately often, in all the various types of employment discrimination cases; and employment discrimination litigants appeal more often than other litigants, with the defendants doing far better on those appeals than the plaintiffs

How Employment Discrimination Plaintiffs Fare in Federal Court

This article presents the full range of information that the Administrative Office’s data convey on federal employment discrimination litigation. From that information, the authors tell three stories about (1) bringing these claims, (2) their outcome in the district court, and (3) the effect of appeal. Each of these stories is a sad one for employment discrimination plaintiffs: relatively often, the numerous plaintiffs must pursue their claims all the way through trial, which is usually a jury trial; at both pretrial and trial these plaintiffs lose disproportionately often, in all the various types of employment discrimination cases; and employment discrimination litigants appeal more often than other litigants, with the defendants doing far better on those appeals than the plaintiffs

How Employment-Discrimination Plaintiffs Fare in the Federal Courts of Appeals

Employment-discrimination plaintiffs swim against the tide. Compared to the typical plaintiff, they win a lower proportion of cases during pretrial and after trial. Then, many of their successful cases are appealed. On appeal, they have a harder time in upholding their successes, as well in reversing adverse outcome. This tough story does not describe some tiny corner of the litigation world. Employment-discrimination cases constitute an increasing fraction of the federal civil docket, now reigning as the largest single category of cases at nearly 10 percent. In this article, we use official government data to describe the appellate phase of this important segment of federal litigation. After describing the database, the text tells the appellate story for employment-discrimination actions through graphs and tables, with some general observations followed by a specific lesson

How Employment-Discrimination Plaintiffs Fare in the Federal Courts of Appeals

Employment-discrimination plaintiffs swim against the tide. Compared to the typical plaintiff, they win a lower proportion of cases during pretrial and after trial. Then, many of their successful cases are appealed. On appeal, they have a harder time in upholding their successes, as well in reversing adverse outcome. This tough story does not describe some tiny corner of the litigation world. Employment-discrimination cases constitute an increasing fraction of the federal civil docket, now reigning as the largest single category of cases at nearly 10 percent. In this article, we use official government data to describe the appellate phase of this important segment of federal litigation. After describing the database, the text tells the appellate story for employment-discrimination actions through graphs and tables, with some general observations followed by a specific lesson