ArticleBMC genetics2016
A novel Markov Blanket-based repeated-fishing strategy for capturing phenotype-related biomarkers in big omics data.
Article in BMC genetics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- STS-BN: An efficient Bayesian network method for detecting causal SNPs.Frontiers in genetics · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe propose a novel Markov Blanket-based repeated-fishing strategy (MBRFS) in attempt to increase the power of existing Markov Blanket method (DASSO-MB) and maintain its advantages in omic data analysis.
resultsBoth simulation and real data analysis were conducted to assess its performances by comparing with other methods including χ(2) test with Bonferroni and B-H adjustment, least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) and DASSO-MB. A serious of simulation studies showed that the true discovery rate (TDR) of proposed MBRFS was always close to zero under null hypothesis (odds ratio = 1 for each SNPs) with excellent stability in all three scenarios of independent phenotype-related SNPs without linkage disequilibrium (LD) around them, correlated phenotype-related SNPs without LD around them, and phenotype-related SNPs with strong LD around them. As expected, under different odds ratio and minor allel frequency (MAFs), MBRFS always had the best performances in capturing the true phenotype-related biomarkers with higher matthews correlation coefficience (MCC) for all three scenarios above. More importantly, since proposed MBRFS using the repeated fishing strategy, it still captures more phenotype-related SNPs with minor effects when non-significant phenotype-related SNPs emerged under χ(2) test after Bonferroni multiple correction. The various real omics data analysis, including GWAS data, DNA methylation data, gene expression data and metabolites data, indicated that the proposed MBRFS always detected relatively reasonable biomarkers.
conclusionsOur proposed MBRFS can exactly capture the true phenotype-related biomarkers with the reduction of false negative rate when the phenotype-related biomarkers are independent or correlated, as well as the circumstance that phenotype-related biomarkers are associated with non-phenotype-related ones.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.