ArticleScientific reports2016
A powerful weighted statistic for detecting group differences of directed biological networks.
Article in Scientific reports, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Network regression analysis in transcriptome-wide association studies.BMC genomics · 2022Article
- Simultaneous differential network analysis and classification for matrix-variate data with application to brain connectivity.Biostatistics (Oxford, England) · 2022Article
- Brain connectivity alteration detection via matrix-variate differential network model.Biometrics · 2021Article
- PMINR: Pointwise Mutual Information-Based Network Regression - With Application to Studies of Lung Cancer and Alzheimer's Disease.Frontiers in genetics · 2020Article
- Identifying and exploiting gene-pathway interactions from RNA-seq data for binary phenotype.BMC genetics · 2019Article
- A Machine Learning Method for Identifying Critical Interactions Between Gene Pairs in Alzheimer's Disease Prediction.Frontiers in neurology · 2019Article
- A new insight into underlying disease mechanism through semi-parametric latent differential network model.BMC bioinformatics · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Complex disease is largely determined by a number of biomolecules interwoven into networks, rather than a single biomolecule. Different physiological conditions such as cases and controls may manifest as different networks. Statistical comparison between biological networks can provide not only new insight into the disease mechanism but statistical guidance for drug development. However, the methods developed in previous studies are inadequate to capture the changes in both the nodes and edges, and often ignore the network structure. In this study, we present a powerful weighted statistical test for group differences of directed biological networks, which is independent of the network attributes and can capture the changes in both the nodes and edges, as well as simultaneously accounting for the network structure through putting more weights on the difference of nodes locating on relatively more important position. Simulation studies illustrate that this method had better performance than previous ones under various sample sizes and network structures. One application to GWAS of leprosy successfully identifies the specific gene interaction network contributing to leprosy. Another real data analysis significantly identifies a new biological network, which is related to acute myeloid leukemia. One potential network responsible for lung cancer has also been significantly detected. The source R code is available on our website.
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.