Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26093633›Full record

ArticleBMC bioinformatics2015

Factors affecting the accuracy of a class prediction model in gene expression data.

Putri W Novianti, Victor L Jong, Kit C B Roes, Marinus J C Eijkemans

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Metabolic Syndrome Prediction Models Using Machine Learning and Sasang Constitution Type.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2021
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
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

4 authors.

Putri W NoviantiBiostatistics & Research Support, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, 3508, GA, Utrecht, The Netherlands. Novianti-3@umcutrecht.nl.
Victor L JongBiostatistics & Research Support, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, 3508, GA, Utrecht, The Netherlands. Jong@umcutecht.nl.
Kit C B RoesBiostatistics & Research Support, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, 3508, GA, Utrecht, The Netherlands. Roes@umcutrecht.nl.
Marinus J C EijkemansBiostatistics & Research Support, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, 3508, GA, Utrecht, The Netherlands. M.J.C.Eijkemans@umcutrecht.nl.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundClass prediction models have been shown to have varying performances in clinical gene expression datasets. Previous evaluation studies, mostly done in the field of cancer, showed that the accuracy of class prediction models differs from dataset to dataset and depends on the type of classification function. While a substantial amount of information is known about the characteristics of classification functions, little has been done to determine which characteristics of gene expression data have impact on the performance of a classifier. This study aims to empirically identify data characteristics that affect the predictive accuracy of classification models, outside of the field of cancer.

resultsDatasets from twenty five studies meeting predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria were downloaded. Nine classification functions were chosen, falling within the categories: discriminant analyses or Bayes classifiers, tree based, regularization and shrinkage and nearest neighbors methods. Consequently, nine class prediction models were built for each dataset using the same procedure and their performances were evaluated by calculating their accuracies. The characteristics of each experiment were recorded, (i.e., observed disease, medical question, tissue/cell types and sample size) together with characteristics of the gene expression data, namely the number of differentially expressed genes, the fold changes and the within-class correlations. Their effects on the accuracy of a class prediction model were statistically assessed by random effects logistic regression. The number of differentially expressed genes and the average fold change had significant impact on the accuracy of a classification model and gave individual explained-variation in prediction accuracy of up to 72% and 57%, respectively. Multivariable random effects logistic regression with forward selection yielded the two aforementioned study factors and the within class correlation as factors affecting the accuracy of classification functions, explaining 91.5% of the between study variation.

conclusionsWe evaluated study- and data-related factors that might explain the varying performances of classification functions in non-cancerous datasets. Our results showed that the number of differentially expressed genes, the fold change, and the correlation in gene expression data significantly affect the accuracy of class prediction models.

Indexed as

Gene Expression RegulationModels, TheoreticalBayes TheoremBiomarkersCell LineageCommunicable DiseasesDiscriminant AnalysisGene Expression ProfilingHumansSample SizeSupport Vector MachineBiomarkers

Identifiers

PMID26093633
PMCPMC4475623

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.