Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29151892›Full record

ArticleBioData mining2017

Metrics to estimate differential co-expression networks.

Elpidio-Emmanuel Gonzalez-Valbuena, Víctor Treviño

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BioData mining, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Network Analysis of Microarray Data.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2022
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Elpidio-Emmanuel Gonzalez-ValbuenaCátedra de Bioinformática, Escuela de Medicina, Tecnológico de Monterrey, 64710 Monterrey, Nuevo León Mexico.
Víctor TreviñoCátedra de Bioinformática, Escuela de Medicina, Tecnológico de Monterrey, 64710 Monterrey, Nuevo León Mexico.ORCID 0000-0002-7472-9844

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDetecting the differences in gene expression data is important for understanding the underlying molecular mechanisms. Although the differentially expressed genes are a large component, differences in correlation are becoming an interesting approach to achieving deeper insights. However, diverse metrics have been used to detect differential correlation, making selection and use of a single metric difficult. In addition, available implementations are metric-specific, complicating their use in different contexts. Moreover, because the analyses in the literature have been performed on real data, there are uncertainties regarding the performance of metrics and procedures.

resultsIn this work, we compare four novel and two previously proposed metrics to detect differential correlations. We generated well-controlled datasets into which differences in correlations were carefully introduced by controlled multivariate normal correlation networks and addition of noise. The comparisons were performed on three datasets derived from real tumor data. Our results show that metrics differ in their detection performance and computational time. No single metric was the best in all datasets, but trends show that three metrics are highly correlated and are very good candidates for real data analysis. In contrast, other metrics proposed in the literature seem to show low performance and different detections. Overall, our results suggest that metrics that do not filter correlations perform better. We also show an additional analysis of TCGA breast cancer subtypes.

conclusionsWe show a methodology to generate controlled datasets for the objective evaluation of differential correlation pipelines, and compare the performance of several metrics. We implemented in R a package called

Indexed as

Data simulationDifferential correlationNetworks

Identifiers

PMID29151892
PMCPMC5681815

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.