Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25475910›Full record

ArticleBMC bioinformatics2014

Comparative evaluation of gene set analysis approaches for RNA-Seq data.

Yasir Rahmatallah, Frank Emmert-Streib, Galina Glazko

Abstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing 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

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Frontiers in pharmacology · 2023
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Advanced Applications of RNA Sequencing and Challenges.Bioinformatics and biology insights · 2015
    Review
  19. Review
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

3 authors.

Yasir RahmatallahDivision of Biomedical Informatics, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AR, 72205, USA. yrahmatallah@uams.edu.
Frank Emmert-StreibComputational Biology and Machine Learning Laboratory, Center for Cancer Research and Cell Biology, School of Medicine, Dentistry and Biomedical Sciences, Queen's University Belfast, 97 Lisburn Road, Belfast, BT9 7BL, UK. v@bio-complexity.com.
Galina GlazkoDivision of Biomedical Informatics, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AR, 72205, USA. gvglazko@uams.edu.

Funding

VIRULENCE MECHANISMS IN ESCHERICHIA COLIP20RR016460 · NCRR · UNIV OF ARKANSAS FOR MED SCIS · PI HENSLEY, LORI · 2001 to 2011
$33.1M
Arkansas Center for Clinical and Translational ResearchUL1TR000039 · NCATS · UNIV OF ARKANSAS FOR MED SCIS · PI BECK, CORNELIA MARIE, JAMES, LAURA P · 2012 to 2014
$10.0M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000039NCATS NIH HHS UL1TR000039NCRR NIH HHS P20 RR016460NCRR NIH HHS P20RR16460
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOver the last few years transcriptome sequencing (RNA-Seq) has almost completely taken over microarrays for high-throughput studies of gene expression. Currently, the most popular use of RNA-Seq is to identify genes which are differentially expressed between two or more conditions. Despite the importance of Gene Set Analysis (GSA) in the interpretation of the results from RNA-Seq experiments, the limitations of GSA methods developed for microarrays in the context of RNA-Seq data are not well understood.

resultsWe provide a thorough evaluation of popular multivariate and gene-level self-contained GSA approaches on simulated and real RNA-Seq data. The multivariate approach employs multivariate non-parametric tests combined with popular normalizations for RNA-Seq data. The gene-level approach utilizes univariate tests designed for the analysis of RNA-Seq data to find gene-specific P-values and combines them into a pathway P-value using classical statistical techniques. Our results demonstrate that the Type I error rate and the power of multivariate tests depend only on the test statistics and are insensitive to the different normalizations. In general standard multivariate GSA tests detect pathways that do not have any bias in terms of pathways size, percentage of differentially expressed genes, or average gene length in a pathway. In contrast the Type I error rate and the power of gene-level GSA tests are heavily affected by the methods for combining P-values, and all aforementioned biases are present in detected pathways.

conclusionsOur result emphasizes the importance of using self-contained non-parametric multivariate tests for detecting differentially expressed pathways for RNA-Seq data and warns against applying gene-level GSA tests, especially because of their high level of Type I error rates for both, simulated and real data.

Indexed as

Genes, X-LinkedSignal TransductionComputer SimulationFemaleGene Expression ProfilingHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHumansLymphocytesMaleRNASequence Analysis, RNASoftwareRNA

Identifiers

PMID25475910
PMCPMC4265362

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.