ArticlePloS one2018
A simple null model for inferences from network enrichment analysis.
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 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Pathway analysis through mutual information.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2024Article
- Parallelized calculation of permutation tests.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2021Article
- Effects of Fluoride on Submandibular Glands of Mice: Changes in Oxidative Biochemistry, Proteomic Profile, and Genotoxicity.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A prevailing technique to infer function from lists of identifications, from molecular biological high-throughput experiments, is over-representation analysis, where the identifications are compared to predefined sets of related genes often referred to as pathways. As at least some pathways are known to be incomplete in their annotation, algorithmic efforts have been made to complement them with information from functional association networks. While the terminology varies in the literature, we will here refer to such methods as Network Enrichment Analysis (NEA). Traditionally, the significance of inferences from NEA has been assigned using a null model constructed from randomizations of the network. Here we instead argue for a null model that more directly relates to the set of genes being studied, and have designed one dynamic programming algorithm that calculates the score distribution of NEA scores that makes it possible to assign unbiased mid p values to inferences. We also implemented a random sampling method, carrying out the same task. We demonstrate that our method obtains a superior statistical calibration as compared to the popular NEA inference engine, BinoX, while also providing statistics that are easier to interpret.
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.