Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24723569›Full record

ArticleBriefings in bioinformatics2015

Letter to the Editor: On the term 'interaction' and related phrases in the literature on Random Forests.

Anne-Laure Boulesteix, Silke Janitza, Alexander Hapfelmeier, Kristel Van Steen, Carolin Strobl

Abstract readLetterComment
In one paragraph

Article in Briefings in bioinformatics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
–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

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Insights into heart failure metabolite markers through explainable machine learning.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2025
    Article
  4. Transcriptome Study of 2 Black Cohorts RevealsJournal of the American Heart Association · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Classification Tree Analysis as a Method for Uncovering Relations Between CHRNA5A3B4 and CHRNB3A6 in Predicting Smoking Progression in Adolescent Smokers.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2017
    Article
  17. A Clinical Decision Tree to Predict Whether a Bacteremic Patient Is Infected With an Extended-Spectrum β-Lactamase-Producing Organism.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2016
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Anne-Laure Boulesteix
Silke Janitza
Alexander Hapfelmeier
Kristel Van Steen
Carolin Strobl

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In an interesting and quite exhaustive review on Random Forests (RF) methodology in bioinformatics Touw et al. address--among other topics--the problem of the detection of interactions between variables based on RF methodology. We feel that some important statistical concepts, such as 'interaction', 'conditional dependence' or 'correlation', are sometimes employed inconsistently in the bioinformatics literature in general and in the literature on RF in particular. In this letter to the Editor, we aim to clarify some of the central statistical concepts and point out some confusing interpretations concerning RF given by Touw et al. and other authors.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsBiological Science DisciplinesData MiningHumansconditional inference treesconditional variable importancecorrelationinteractionrandom foreststatistics

Identifiers

PMID24723569
PMCPMC4364067

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.