Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24464287›Full record

ArticleNature methods2014

Similarity network fusion for aggregating data types on a genomic scale.

Bo Wang, Aziz M Mezlini, Feyyaz Demir, Marc Fiume, Zhuowen Tu, Michael Brudno, Benjamin Haibe-Kains, Anna Goldenberg

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Nature methods, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 904 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
904citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
27.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

904 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 2,048 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Phenotyping Preeclampsia Using Unsupervised Machine Learning: A Prospective Cohort Study.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2026
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review

844 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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Bo Wang1] Genetics and Genome Biology, SickKids Research Institute, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. [2].
Aziz M Mezlini1] Genetics and Genome Biology, SickKids Research Institute, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. [2] Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Feyyaz Demir1] Genetics and Genome Biology, SickKids Research Institute, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. [2] Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Marc FiumeDepartment of Computer Science, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Zhuowen TuDepartment of Cognitive Science, University of California San Diego, San Diego, California, USA.
Michael Brudno1] Genetics and Genome Biology, SickKids Research Institute, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. [2] Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Benjamin Haibe-Kains1] Institut de Recherches Cliniques de Montréal, Université de Montréal, Montréal, Quebec, Canada. [2].ORCID 0000000276840079
Anna Goldenberg1] Genetics and Genome Biology, SickKids Research Institute, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. [2] Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
University of Toronto · CAMontreal Clinical Research Institute · CASickKids Foundation · CAUniversity of California San Diego · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent technologies have made it cost-effective to collect diverse types of genome-wide data. Computational methods are needed to combine these data to create a comprehensive view of a given disease or a biological process. Similarity network fusion (SNF) solves this problem by constructing networks of samples (e.g., patients) for each available data type and then efficiently fusing these into one network that represents the full spectrum of underlying data. For example, to create a comprehensive view of a disease given a cohort of patients, SNF computes and fuses patient similarity networks obtained from each of their data types separately, taking advantage of the complementarity in the data. We used SNF to combine mRNA expression, DNA methylation and microRNA (miRNA) expression data for five cancer data sets. SNF substantially outperforms single data type analysis and established integrative approaches when identifying cancer subtypes and is effective for predicting survival.

Indexed as

Gene Regulatory NetworksGenomicsBrain NeoplasmsComputational BiologyDiseaseGlioblastomaHumansStatistics as Topic

Identifiers

PMID24464287
OpenAlexW1987219048

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.