Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30200879›Full record

ArticleBMC bioinformatics2018

Identification of differentially expressed genes by means of outlier detection.

Itziar Irigoien, Concepción Arenas

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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.

Itziar IrigoienDepartment of Computation Science and Artificial Intelligence, University of the Basque Country UPV/EHU, Donostia, Spain.
Concepción ArenasDepartment of Genetics, Microbiology and Statistics, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain. carenas@ub.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6489-4934

Funding

Spanish Ministerio de Economia y Competitividad SAF2015-68341-RSpanish Ministerio de Economia y Competitividad TIN2015-64395-R
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAn important issue in microarray data is to select, from thousands of genes, a small number of informative differentially expressed (DE) genes which may be key elements for a disease. If each gene is analyzed individually, there is a big number of hypotheses to test and a multiple comparison correction method must be used. Consequently, the resulting cut-off value may be too small. Moreover, an important issue is the selection's replicability of the DE genes. We present a new method, called ORdensity, to obtain a reproducible selection of DE genes. It takes into account the relation between all genes and it is not a gene-by-gene approach, unlike the usually applied techniques to DE gene selection.

resultsThe proposed method returns three measures, related to the concepts of outlier and density of false positives in a neighbourhood, which allow us to identify the DE genes with high classification accuracy. To assess the performance of ORdensity, we used simulated microarray data and four real microarray cancer data sets. The results indicated that the method correctly detects the DE genes; it is competitive with other well accepted methods; the list of DE genes that it obtains is useful for the correct classification or diagnosis of new future samples and, in general, it is more stable than other procedures.

conclusionsORdensity is a new method for identifying DE genes that avoids some of the shortcomings of the individual gene identification and it is stable when the original sample is changed by subsamples.

Indexed as

BiomarkersGene Expression ProfilingHumansNeoplasmsOligonucleotide Array Sequence AnalysisBiomarkersDifferentially expressed geneMultivariate statisticsOutlierQuantile

Identifiers

PMID30200879
PMCPMC6131896

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.