Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26170834›Full record

ReviewAdvances in bioinformatics2015

A Review of Feature Selection and Feature Extraction Methods Applied on Microarray Data.

Zena M Hira, Duncan F Gillies

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Advances in bioinformatics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 181 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
181citing 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

181 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Neural Latent Filtering for Gene Discovery in Breast Cancer Subtypes.Biotechnology reports (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Identification of HybridBiosensors · 2025
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Predicting EGFRPharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

121 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

2 authors.

Zena M HiraDepartment of Computing, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, UK.
Duncan F GilliesDepartment of Computing, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We summarise various ways of performing dimensionality reduction on high-dimensional microarray data. Many different feature selection and feature extraction methods exist and they are being widely used. All these methods aim to remove redundant and irrelevant features so that classification of new instances will be more accurate. A popular source of data is microarrays, a biological platform for gathering gene expressions. Analysing microarrays can be difficult due to the size of the data they provide. In addition the complicated relations among the different genes make analysis more difficult and removing excess features can improve the quality of the results. We present some of the most popular methods for selecting significant features and provide a comparison between them. Their advantages and disadvantages are outlined in order to provide a clearer idea of when to use each one of them for saving computational time and resources.

Identifiers

PMID26170834
PMCPMC4480804

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.