ArticleNucleic acids research2005
Analysis of host response to bacterial infection using error model based gene expression microarray experiments.
Article in Nucleic acids research, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Transcriptome Analysis Reveals Modulation of Human Stem Cells from the Apical Papilla by Species Associated with Dental Root Canal Infection.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Article
- Shiga toxin remodels the intestinal epithelial transcriptional response to Enterohemorrhagic Escherichia coli.PLoS pathogens · 2021Article
- A Network Biology Approach Identifies Molecular Cross-Talk between Normal Prostate Epithelial and Prostate Carcinoma Cells.PLoS computational biology · 2016Article
- Genome-wide identification of Chlamydia trachomatis antigens associated with trachomatous trichiasis.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2012Article
- Deep analysis of cellular transcriptomes - LongSAGE versus classic MPSS.BMC genomics · 2007Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A key step in the analysis of microarray data is the selection of genes that are differentially expressed. Ideally, such experiments should be properly replicated in order to infer both technical and biological variability, and the data should be subjected to rigorous hypothesis tests to identify the differentially expressed genes. However, in microarray experiments involving the analysis of very large numbers of biological samples, replication is not always practical. Therefore, there is a need for a method to select differentially expressed genes in a rational way from insufficiently replicated data. In this paper, we describe a simple method that uses bootstrapping to generate an error model from a replicated pilot study that can be used to identify differentially expressed genes in subsequent large-scale studies on the same platform, but in which there may be no replicated arrays. The method builds a stratified error model that includes array-to-array variability, feature-to-feature variability and the dependence of error on signal intensity. We apply this model to the characterization of the host response in a model of bacterial infection of human intestinal epithelial cells. We demonstrate the effectiveness of error model based microarray experiments and propose this as a general strategy for a microarray-based screening of large collections of biological samples.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.