Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26141830›Full record

ArticleBriefings in bioinformatics2016

Using prior knowledge from cellular pathways and molecular networks for diagnostic specimen classification.

Enrico Glaab

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Briefings in bioinformatics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Construction of a pathway-level model for preeclampsia based on gene expression data.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

1 author.

Enrico Glaab

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

For many complex diseases, an earlier and more reliable diagnosis is considered a key prerequisite for developing more effective therapies to prevent or delay disease progression. Classical statistical learning approaches for specimen classification using omics data, however, often cannot provide diagnostic models with sufficient accuracy and robustness for heterogeneous diseases like cancers or neurodegenerative disorders. In recent years, new approaches for building multivariate biomarker models on omics data have been proposed, which exploit prior biological knowledge from molecular networks and cellular pathways to address these limitations. This survey provides an overview of these recent developments and compares pathway- and network-based specimen classification approaches in terms of their utility for improving model robustness, accuracy and biological interpretability. Different routes to translate omics-based multifactorial biomarker models into clinical diagnostic tests are discussed, and a previous study is presented as example.

Indexed as

BiomarkersDisease ProgressionHumansNeoplasmsBiomarkersbiomarker modelingcross-study analysismachine learningnetwork analysispathway analysis

Identifiers

PMID26141830
PMCPMC4870394

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.