ArticleBiometrics2016
PCAN: Probabilistic correlation analysis of two non-normal data sets.
Article in Biometrics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sparse Gaussianized Canonical Correlation Analysis with Applications to Portfolio Analysis.Journal of the American Statistical Association · 2026Article
- Article
- Gut-host Crosstalk: Methodological and Computational Challenges.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Most cancer research now involves one or more assays profiling various biological molecules, e.g., messenger RNA and micro RNA, in samples collected on the same individuals. The main interest with these genomic data sets lies in the identification of a subset of features that are active in explaining the dependence between platforms. To quantify the strength of the dependency between two variables, correlation is often preferred. However, expression data obtained from next-generation sequencing platforms are integer with very low counts for some important features. In this case, the sample Pearson correlation is not a valid estimate of the true correlation matrix, because the sample correlation estimate between two features/variables with low counts will often be close to zero, even when the natural parameters of the Poisson distribution are, in actuality, highly correlated. We propose a model-based approach to correlation estimation between two non-normal data sets, via a method we call Probabilistic Correlations ANalysis, or PCAN. PCAN takes into consideration the distributional assumption about both data sets and suggests that correlations estimated at the model natural parameter level are more appropriate than correlations estimated directly on the observed data. We demonstrate through a simulation study that PCAN outperforms other standard approaches in estimating the true correlation between the natural parameters. We then apply PCAN to the joint analysis of a microRNA (miRNA) and a messenger RNA (mRNA) expression data set from a squamous cell lung cancer study, finding a large number of negative correlation pairs when compared to the standard approaches.
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.