Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22546560›Full record

ReviewGenomics2012

Random forests for genomic data analysis.

Xi Chen, Hemant Ishwaran

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Genomics, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 383 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
383citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

383 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

323 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Xi ChenDepartment of Biostatistics, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN 37232, USA. steven.chen@vanderbilt.edu
Hemant Ishwaran

Funding

Tumor Immunology and Microenvironment Research ProgramP30CA068485 · NCI · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI MATTHEW J TYSKA · 1995 to 2026
$172.8M
Integrative prediction models for metastasis risk in colon cancerR01CA158472 · NCI · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY · PI BEAUCHAMP, ROBERT DANIEL, CHEN, XI STEVEN · 2012 to 2016
$2.3M
RF-SRC: A Unified Data ToolR01CA163739 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI SCHOOL OF MEDICINE · PI ISHWARAN, HEMANT · 2012 to 2015
$966k
NCI NIH HHS 5P30CA068485-15NCI NIH HHS P30 CA068485NCI NIH HHS R01 CA158472NCI NIH HHS R01 CA163739
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Random forests (RF) is a popular tree-based ensemble machine learning tool that is highly data adaptive, applies to "large p, small n" problems, and is able to account for correlation as well as interactions among features. This makes RF particularly appealing for high-dimensional genomic data analysis. In this article, we systematically review the applications and recent progresses of RF for genomic data, including prediction and classification, variable selection, pathway analysis, genetic association and epistasis detection, and unsupervised learning.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceDatabases, FactualComputational BiologyEpistasis, GeneticGenetic Association StudiesGenomics

Identifiers

PMID22546560
PMCPMC3387489

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.