Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 22, 2026

An Integrated Workflow of Identification and Quantification on FDR Control-Based Untargeted Metabolome
Published on: September 20, 2022
Why are two mistakes not worse than one? A proposal for controlling the expected number of false claims
1Department of Mathematics Statistics, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK.
Abstract:
Multiplicity is common in clinical studies and the current standard is to use the familywise error rate to ensure that the errors are kept at a prespecified level. In this paper, we will show that, in certain situations, familywise error rate control does not account for all errors made. To counteract this problem, we propose the use of the expected number of false claims (EFC). We will show that a (weighted) Bonferroni approach can be used to control the EFC, discuss how a study that uses the EFC can be powered for co-primary, exchangeable, and hierarchical endpoints, and show how the weight for the weighted Bonferroni test can be determined in this manner. ©2016 The Authors. Pharmaceutical Statistics Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Insights
Familywise error rate control in clinical studies may miss errors. This paper proposes using the expected number of false claims (EFC) and a weighted Bonferroni approach to better manage statistical errors in research.
Area of Science:
- Statistics
- Clinical Trials
- Biostatistics
Background:
- Multiplicity is prevalent in clinical studies.
- Current standard uses familywise error rate (FWER) for error control.
Purpose of the Study:
- To highlight limitations of FWER in specific clinical study situations.
- To introduce the expected number of false claims (EFC) as an alternative error metric.
- To propose methods for controlling EFC in clinical research.
Main Methods:
- Demonstrate situations where FWER is insufficient.
- Introduce and define the expected number of false claims (EFC).
- Adapt a (weighted) Bonferroni approach for EFC control.
Main Results:
- FWER control does not account for all errors in certain scenarios.
- A weighted Bonferroni method can effectively control EFC.
- Methods for powering studies with EFC for various endpoint types are discussed.
Conclusions:
- The expected number of false claims (EFC) offers a more comprehensive error control strategy than FWER.
- A weighted Bonferroni approach provides a practical method for controlling EFC.
- This framework supports robust statistical decision-making in complex clinical trials.
Related Concept Videos
Testing a Claim about Population Proportion
There are two methods of testing a claim about a population proportion: (1) Using the sample proportion from the data where a binomial distribution is approximated to the normal distribution and (2) Using the binomial probabilities calculated from the data.
The first method uses normal distribution as an approximation to the binomial distribution. The requirements are as follows: sample size is large...
Accuracy and Errors in Hypothesis Testing
In hypothesis testing, the probability of making a Type I error, denoted as α, is commonly set at 0.05. This significance level indicates a 5%...
Controls in Experiments
Errors In Hypothesis Tests
Testing a Claim about Standard Deviation
The hypothesis testing for the claim of population standard deviation (or variance) requires the data and samples to be random and unbiased. The population distribution also must be normal. There is no specific requirement on the sample size as the estimation is based on the chi-square distribution.
As a first step, the hypothesis (null and alternative) concerning the claim about...
Types of Errors: Detection and Minimization
Absolute error in a measurement is the numerical difference from the true or central value. Relative error is the ratio between absolute error and the true or central value, expressed as a percentage.
Errors can be classified by source, magnitude, and sign. There are three types of errors: systematic, random, and gross.
Systematic or...

