ReviewBioinformatics and biology insights2016
Genome Data Exploration Using Correspondence Analysis.
Review in Bioinformatics and biology insights, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Rapid Evolution of Multidrug Resistance in a Candida lusitaniae Infection during Micafungin Monotherapy.Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2023Article
- Personalized prediction of the secondary oocytes number after ovarian stimulation: A machine learning model based on clinical and genetic data.PLoS computational biology · 2023Article
- Genetic diversity and population structure of wild and cultivated Crotalaria species based on genotyping-by-sequencing.PloS one · 2022Article
- Abundance and Expression of Shiga Toxin Genes inFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2021Article
- Association between Nine Types of TCM Constitution and Five Chronic Diseases: A Correspondence Analysis Based on a Sample of 2,660 Participants.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recent developments of sequencing technologies that allow the production of massive amounts of genomic and genotyping data have highlighted the need for synthetic data representation and pattern recognition methods that can mine and help discovering biologically meaningful knowledge included in such large data sets. Correspondence analysis (CA) is an exploratory descriptive method designed to analyze two-way data tables, including some measure of association between rows and columns. It constructs linear combinations of variables, known as factors. CA has been used for decades to study high-dimensional data, and remarkable inferences from large data tables were obtained by reducing the dimensionality to a few orthogonal factors that correspond to the largest amount of variability in the data. Herein, I review CA and highlight its use by considering examples in handling high-dimensional data that can be constructed from genomic and genetic studies. Examples in amino acid compositions of large sets of species (viruses, phages, yeast, and fungi) as well as an example related to pairwise shared orthologs in a set of yeast and fungal species, as obtained from their proteome comparisons, are considered. For the first time, results show striking segregations between yeasts and fungi as well as between viruses and phages. Distributions obtained from shared orthologs show clusters of yeast and fungal species corresponding to their phylogenetic relationships. A direct comparison with the principal component analysis method is discussed using a recently published example of genotyping data related to newly discovered traces of an ancient hominid that was compared to modern human populations in the search for ancestral similarities. CA offers more detailed results highlighting links between modern humans and the ancient hominid and their characterizations. Compared to the popular principal component analysis method, CA allows easier and more effective interpretation of results, particularly by the ability of relating individual patterns with their corresponding characteristic variables.
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.