Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29485993›Full record

ArticlePloS one2018

Assessment of data transformations for model-based clustering of RNA-Seq data.

Janelle R Noel-MacDonnell, Joseph Usset, Ellen L Goode, Brooke L Fridley

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 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

4 authors.

Janelle R Noel-MacDonnellDepartment of Biostatistics, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, United States of America.
Joseph UssetDepartment of Biostatistics, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, United States of America.
Ellen L GoodeDepartment of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States of America.
Brooke L FridleyDepartment of Biostatistics, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-7739-7956

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Quality control, global biases, normalization, and analysis methods for RNA-Seq data are quite different than those for microarray-based studies. The assumption of normality is reasonable for microarray based gene expression data; however, RNA-Seq data tend to follow an over-dispersed Poisson or negative binomial distribution. Little research has been done to assess how data transformations impact Gaussian model-based clustering with respect to clustering performance and accuracy in estimating the correct number of clusters in RNA-Seq data. In this article, we investigate Gaussian model-based clustering performance and accuracy in estimating the correct number of clusters by applying four data transformations (i.e., naïve, logarithmic, Blom, and variance stabilizing transformation) to simulated RNA-Seq data. To do so, an extensive simulation study was carried out in which the scenarios varied in terms of: how genes were selected to be included in the clustering analyses, size of the clusters, and number of clusters. Following the application of the different transformations to the simulated data, Gaussian model-based clustering was carried out. To assess clustering performance for each of the data transformations, the adjusted rand index, clustering error rate, and concordance index were utilized. As expected, our results showed that clustering performance was gained in scenarios where data transformations were applied to make the data appear "more" Gaussian in distribution.

Indexed as

Models, GeneticSequence Analysis, RNACluster AnalysisFemaleHumansLikelihood FunctionsOvarian Neoplasms

Identifiers

PMID29485993
PMCPMC5828440

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.