ArticleBioinformatics (Oxford, England)2018
Generalized correlation measure using count statistics for gene expression data with ordered samples.
Article in Bioinformatics (Oxford, England), 2018. 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, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Gene Co-Expression Network Tools and Databases for Crop Improvement.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Network Modeling in Biology: Statistical Methods for Gene and Brain Networks.Statistical science : a review journal of the Institute of Mathematical Statistics · 2021Article
- TimeMeter assesses temporal gene expression similarity and identifies differentially progressing genes.Nucleic acids research · 2020Article
- Article
- GeneFishing to reconstruct context specific portraits of biological processes.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2019Article
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 at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Motivation: Capturing association patterns in gene expression levels under different conditions or time points is important for inferring gene regulatory interactions. In practice, temporal changes in gene expression may result in complex association patterns that require more sophisticated detection methods than simple correlation measures. For instance, the effect of regulation may lead to time-lagged associations and interactions local to a subset of samples. Furthermore, expression profiles of interest may not be aligned or directly comparable (e.g. gene expression profiles from two species). Results: We propose a count statistic for measuring association between pairs of gene expression profiles consisting of ordered samples (e.g. time-course), where correlation may only exist locally in subsequences separated by a position shift. The statistic is simple and fast to compute, and we illustrate its use in two applications. In a cross-species comparison of developmental gene expression levels, we show our method not only measures association of gene expressions between the two species, but also provides alignment between different developmental stages. In the second application, we applied our statistic to expression profiles from two distinct phenotypic conditions, where the samples in each profile are ordered by the associated phenotypic values. The detected associations can be useful in building correspondence between gene association networks under different phenotypes. On the theoretical side, we provide asymptotic distributions of the statistic for different regions of the parameter space and test its power on simulated data. Availability and implementation: The code used to perform the analysis is available as part of the Supplementary Material. Contact: msw@usc.edu or hhuang@stat.berkeley.edu. Supplementary information: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.
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.