Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29228182›Full record

ArticleBioinformatics (Oxford, England)2018

PEITH(Θ): perfecting experiments with information theory in Python with GPU support.

Leander Dony, Jonas Mackerodt, Scott Ward, Sarah Filippi, Michael P H Stumpf, Juliane Liepe

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

6 authors.

Leander DonyDepartment of Life Sciences.
Jonas MackerodtDepartment of Life Sciences.
Scott WardDepartment of Life Sciences.
Sarah FilippiFaculty of Medicine, School of Public Health.
Michael P H StumpfDepartment of Life Sciences.
Juliane LiepeDepartment of Life Sciences.

Funding

Medical Research Council G1002092Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Motivation: Different experiments provide differing levels of information about a biological system. This makes it difficult, a priori, to select one of them beyond mere speculation and/or belief, especially when resources are limited. With the increasing diversity of experimental approaches and general advances in quantitative systems biology, methods that inform us about the information content that a given experiment carries about the question we want to answer, become crucial. Results: PEITH(Θ) is a general purpose, Python framework for experimental design in systems biology. PEITH(Θ) uses Bayesian inference and information theory in order to derive which experiments are most informative in order to estimate all model parameters and/or perform model predictions. Availability and implementation: https://github.com/MichaelPHStumpf/Peitho. Contact: m.stumpf@imperial.ac.uk or juliane.liepe@mpibpc.mpg.de.

Indexed as

Information TheorySoftwareBayes TheoremSystems Biology

Identifiers

PMID29228182
PMCPMC5998942

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.