ArticleInternational journal of molecular sciences2019
Current Projection Methods-Induced Biases at Subgroup Detection for Machine-Learning Based Data-Analysis of Biomedical Data.
Article in International journal of molecular sciences, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Article
- Logistic PCA explains differences between genome-scale metabolic models in terms of metabolic pathways.PLoS computational biology · 2024Article
- Euclidean distance-optimized data transformation for cluster analysis in biomedical data (EDOtrans).BMC bioinformatics · 2022Article
- Optimal distribution-preserving downsampling of large biomedical data sets (opdisDownsampling).PloS one · 2021Article
- Article
- Analyzing the fine structure of distributions.PloS one · 2020Article
- Multiparametric Color Tendency Analysis (MCTA): A Method to Analyze Several Flow Cytometry Labelings Simultaneously.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2020Article
- Artificial intelligence and machine learning in pain research: a data scientometric analysis.Pain reportsReview
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
Abstract
Advances in flow cytometry enable the acquisition of large and high-dimensional data sets per patient. Novel computational techniques allow the visualization of structures in these data and, finally, the identification of relevant subgroups. Correct data visualizations and projections from the high-dimensional space to the visualization plane require the correct representation of the structures in the data. This work shows that frequently used techniques are unreliable in this respect. One of the most important methods for data projection in this area is the t-distributed stochastic neighbor embedding (t-SNE). We analyzed its performance on artificial and real biomedical data sets. t-SNE introduced a cluster structure for homogeneously distributed data that did not contain any subgroup structure. In other data sets, t-SNE occasionally suggested the wrong number of subgroups or projected data points belonging to different subgroups, as if belonging to the same subgroup. As an alternative approach, emergent self-organizing maps (ESOM) were used in combination with U-matrix methods. This approach allowed the correct identification of homogeneous data while in sets containing distance or density-based subgroups structures; the number of subgroups and data point assignments were correctly displayed. The results highlight possible pitfalls in the use of a currently widely applied algorithmic technique for the detection of subgroups in high dimensional cytometric data and suggest a robust alternative.
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.