ArticleDatabase : the journal of biological databases and curation2019
A new unbiased and highly automated approach to find new prognostic markers in preclinical research.
Article in Database : the journal of biological databases and curation, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Data acquisition in (pre)clinical studies is often based on a hypothesis. Numerical algorithms, however, may help to find biomarkers from existing data without formulating any hypothesis. By simply assessing whether a statistical relationship exists between two parameters from a (unlimited) database, every (in)conceivable combination of data becomes a hypothesis. The aim was to create an unbiased and highly automated approach for secondary analysis of (pre)clinical research, including the possibility of a non-linear functional relationship. In our example, an almost homogeneous database was formed by overall 45 parameters (vital, blood and plasma parameters) measured in 11 individual experimental studies at 6 different time points using 57 rats without and 63 rats with systemic inflammation following lipopolysaccharide infusion. For each rat, four group classifiers (treatment, survival, study, ID) were used to get valid samples by a later filtering of the statistical base. Any information about the hypothesis leading to the respective studies was suppressed. In order to assess whether a statistical relationship exists, a total of six different functional prototypes (linear and non-linear) were postulated and examined for their regression. Regression quality, correlation and significance were obtained in form of matrices. In our example, ultimately 510 300 regressions were optimized, automatically evaluated and filtered. The developed algorithm is able to reveal statistical relationships from a nearly crude database with low effort by systematic and unbiased analysis. The finding of well-known correlations proves its reliability, whose validity could be increased by clean aggregation of different studies. In addition, new interesting hints for future research could be gained. Thus, unknown markers can be found which are associated with an increased risk of death during systemic inflammation and sepsis. A further development of the program is planned including multiple regressions (more than two parameters could be related to each other) or cluster analysis.
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.