ArticleInterface focus2011
What you see is not what you get: how sampling affects macroscopic features of biological networks.
Article in Interface focus, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Quantifying noise in mass spectrometry and yeast two-hybrid protein interaction detection experiments.Journal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2015Article
- Network epidemiology and plant trade networks.AoB PLANTS · 2014Article
- Structure and dynamics of molecular networks: a novel paradigm of drug discovery: a comprehensive review.Pharmacology & therapeutics · 2013Review
- Proteomics: from single molecules to biological pathways.Cardiovascular research · 2013Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
We use mathematical methods from the theory of tailored random graphs to study systematically the effects of sampling on topological features of large biological signalling networks. Our aim in doing so is to increase our quantitative understanding of the relation between true biological networks and the imperfect and often biased samples of these networks that are reported in public data repositories and used by biomedical scientists. We derive exact explicit formulae for degree distributions and degree correlation kernels of sampled networks, in terms of the degree distributions and degree correlation kernels of the underlying true network, for a broad family of sampling protocols that include random and connectivity-dependent node and/or link undersampling as well as random and connectivity-dependent link oversampling. Our predictions are in excellent agreement with numerical simulations.
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.