Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30967125›Full record

ArticleBMC genetics2019

An integrative U method for joint analysis of multi-level omic data.

Pei Geng, Xiaoran Tong, Qing Lu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC genetics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

3 authors.

Pei GengDepartment of Mathematics, Illinois State University, Normal, IL, 61761, USA.
Xiaoran TongDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, 48824, USA.
Qing LuDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, 48824, USA. qlu@epi.msu.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-7943-966X

Funding

Computational Efficient Statistical Tools for Analyzing Substance Dependence Sequencing DataR01DA043501 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA · PI LU, QING · 2017 to 2021
$2.1M
Methods and Software for High-dimensional Risk Prediction ResearchR01LM012848 · NLM · UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA · PI LU, QING · 2018 to 2021
$1.2M
NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA043501NLM NIH HHS R01 LM012848
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe advance of high-throughput technologies has made it cost-effective to collect diverse types of omic data in large-scale clinical and biological studies. While the collection of the vast amounts of multi-level omic data from these studies provides a great opportunity for genetic research, the high dimensionality of omic data and complex relationships among multi-level omic data bring tremendous analytic challenges.

resultsTo address these challenges, we develop an integrative U (IU) method for the design and analysis of multi-level omic data. While non-parametric methods make less model assumptions and are flexible for analyzing different types of phenotypes and omic data, they have been less developed for association analysis of omic data. The IU method is a nonparametric method that can accommodate various types of omic and phenotype data, and consider interactive relationship among different levels of omic data. Through simulations and a real data application, we compare the IU test with commonly used variance component tests.

conclusionsResults show that the proposed test attains more robust type I error performance and higher empirical power than variance component tests under various types of phenotypes and different underlying interaction effects.

Indexed as

Computational BiologyGenomicsAlgorithmsGenome-Wide Association StudyHumansFunctional data analysisIntegrative analysisNon-parametric method

Identifiers

PMID30967125
PMCPMC6457037

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.