Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30497376›Full record

ArticleBMC bioinformatics2018

Representativeness of variation benchmark datasets.

Gerard C P Schaafsma, Mauno Vihinen

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 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. PON-Fold: Prediction of Substitutions Affecting Protein Folding Rate.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Variation benchmark datasets: update, criteria, quality and applications.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2020
    Article
  12. Functional and Structural Features of Disease-Related Protein Variants.International journal of molecular sciences · 2019
    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.

Gerard C P SchaafsmaProtein Structure and Bioinformatics, Department of Experimental Medical Science, Lund University, BMC B13, SE-221 84, Lund, Sweden.
Mauno VihinenProtein Structure and Bioinformatics, Department of Experimental Medical Science, Lund University, BMC B13, SE-221 84, Lund, Sweden. mauno.vihinen@med.lu.se.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9614-7976

Funding

Vetenskapsrådet 2015-02510
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBenchmark datasets are essential for both method development and performance assessment. These datasets have numerous requirements, representativeness being one. In the case of variant tolerance/pathogenicity prediction, representativeness means that the dataset covers the space of variations and their effects.

resultsWe performed the first analysis of the representativeness of variation benchmark datasets. We used statistical approaches to investigate how proteins in the benchmark datasets were representative for the entire human protein universe. We investigated the distributions of variants in chromosomes, protein structures, CATH domains and classes, Pfam protein families, Enzyme Commission (EC) classifications and Gene Ontology annotations in 24 datasets that have been used for training and testing variant tolerance prediction methods. All the datasets were available in VariBench or VariSNP databases. We tested also whether the pathogenic variant datasets contained neutral variants defined as those that have high minor allele frequency in the ExAC database. The distributions of variants over the chromosomes and proteins varied greatly between the datasets.

conclusionsNone of the datasets was found to be well representative. Many of the tested datasets had quite good coverage of the different protein characteristics. Dataset size correlates to representativeness but only weakly to the performance of methods trained on them. The results imply that dataset representativeness is an important factor and should be taken into account in predictor development and testing.

Indexed as

BenchmarkingDatabases as TopicChromosomesDatabases, ProteinGene FrequencyGene OntologyGenetic VariationHumansMolecular Sequence AnnotationProtein DomainsProteinsProteinsBenchmark datasetsMutationRepresentativenessVariationVariation interpretation

Identifiers

PMID30497376
PMCPMC6267811

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.