Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30412619›Full record

ArticlePloS one2018

A simple null model for inferences from network enrichment analysis.

Gustavo S Jeuken, Lukas Käll

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 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Pathway analysis through mutual information.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2024
    Article
  2. Parallelized calculation of permutation tests.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2021
    Article
  3. 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.

Gustavo S JeukenScience for Life Laboratory, School of Engineering Sciences in Chemistry, Biotechnology and Health, KTH - Royal Institute of Technology, Box 1031, 17121 Solna, Sweden.
Lukas KällScience for Life Laboratory, School of Engineering Sciences in Chemistry, Biotechnology and Health, KTH - Royal Institute of Technology, Box 1031, 17121 Solna, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0001-5689-9797

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

AlgorithmsComputational BiologyData Interpretation, StatisticalGene Expression ProfilingGene Regulatory NetworksHigh-Throughput Screening AssaysMetabolic Networks and PathwaysProtein Interaction MapsSignal TransductionSoftware

Identifiers

PMID30412619
PMCPMC6226187

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.