ArticleBMC bioinformatics2013
An inferential framework for biological network hypothesis tests.
Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Epigenetic networks coordinate DNA methylation across the genome.Molecular therapy : the journal of the American Society of Gene Therapy · 2025Review
- A novel path-specific effect statistic for identifying the differential specific paths in systems epidemiology.BMC genetics · 2020Article
- PMINR: Pointwise Mutual Information-Based Network Regression - With Application to Studies of Lung Cancer and Alzheimer's Disease.Frontiers in genetics · 2020Article
- REFINING CELLULAR PATHWAY MODELS USING AN ENSEMBLE OF HETEROGENEOUS DATA SOURCES.The annals of applied statistics · 2018Article
- JDINAC: joint density-based non-parametric differential interaction network analysis and classification using high-dimensional sparse omics data.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2017Article
- A powerful weighted statistic for detecting group differences of directed biological networks.Scientific reports · 2016Article
- A powerful score-based statistical test for group difference in weighted biological networks.BMC bioinformatics · 2016Article
- Differential analysis of biological networks.BMC bioinformatics · 2015Article
- Detection for pathway effect contributing to disease in systems epidemiology with a case-control design.BMJ open · 2015Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNetworks are ubiquitous in modern cell biology and physiology. A large literature exists for inferring/proposing biological pathways/networks using statistical or machine learning algorithms. Despite these advances a formal testing procedure for analyzing network-level observations is in need of further development. Comparing the behaviour of a pharmacologically altered pathway to its canonical form is an example of a salient one-sample comparison. Locating which pathways differentiate disease from no-disease phenotype may be recast as a two-sample network inference problem.
resultsWe outline an inferential method for performing one- and two-sample hypothesis tests where the sampling unit is a network and the hypotheses are stated via network model(s). We propose a dissimilarity measure that incorporates nearby neighbour information to contrast one or more networks in a statistical test. We demonstrate and explore the utility of our approach with both simulated and microarray data; random graphs and weighted (partial) correlation networks are used to form network models. Using both a well-known diabetes dataset and an ovarian cancer dataset, the methods outlined here could better elucidate co-regulation changes for one or more pathways between two clinically relevant phenotypes.
conclusionsFormal hypothesis tests for gene- or protein-based networks are a logical progression from existing gene-based and gene-set tests for differential expression. Commensurate with the growing appreciation and development of systems biology, the dissimilarity-based testing methods presented here may allow us to improve our understanding of pathways and other complex regulatory systems. The benefit of our method was illustrated under select scenarios.
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.