ArticleEuropean journal of human genetics : EJHG2014
Random forest fishing: a novel approach to identifying organic group of risk factors in genome-wide association studies.
Article in European journal of human genetics : EJHG, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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.
- What makes a good prediction? Feature importance and beginning to open the black box of machine learning in genetics.Human genetics · 2022Review
- Detecting gene-gene interactions using a permutation-based random forest method.BioData mining · 2016Article
- Multivariate Methods for Genetic Variants Selection and Risk Prediction in Cardiovascular Diseases.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2016Review
- Towards the identification of the loci of adaptive evolution.Methods in ecology and evolution · 2015Review
- A whole-genome simulator capable of modeling high-order epistasis for complex disease.Genetic epidemiology · 2013Article
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
Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) has brought methodological challenges in handling massive high-dimensional data and also real opportunities for studying the joint effect of many risk factors acting in concert as an organic group. The random forest (RF) methodology is recognized by many for its potential in examining interaction effects in large data sets. However, RF is not designed to directly handle GWAS data, which typically have hundreds of thousands of single-nucleotide polymorphisms as predictor variables. We propose and evaluate a novel extension of RF, called random forest fishing (RFF), for GWAS analysis. RFF repeatedly updates a relatively small set of predictors obtained by RF tests to find globally important groups predictive of the disease phenotype, using a novel search algorithm based on genetic programming and simulated annealing. A key improvement of RFF results from the use of guidance incorporating empirical test results of genome-wide pairwise interactions. Evaluated using simulated and real GWAS data sets, RFF is shown to be effective in identifying important predictors, particularly when both marginal effects and interactions exist, and is applicable to very large GWAS data sets.
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.