Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31865910›Full record

ArticleBMC bioinformatics2019

VIO: ontology classification and study of vaccine responses given various experimental and analytical conditions.

Edison Ong, Peter Sun, Kimberly Berke, Jie Zheng, Guanming Wu, Yongqun He

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. VO: The Vaccine Ontology.Scientific data · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. VO: The Vaccine Ontology.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025
    Article
  5. A fourfold pathogen reference ontology suite.Journal of biomedical semantics · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Artificial intelligence and the hunt for immunological disorders.Current opinion in allergy and clinical immunology · 2020
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

6 authors.

Edison OngDepartment of Computational Medicine and Bioinformatics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Peter SunCollege of Literature, Science, and the Arts, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Kimberly BerkeCollege of Literature, Science, and the Arts, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Jie ZhengUniversity of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Guanming WuOregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Yongqun HeUnit of Laboratory Animal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. yongqunh@med.umich.edu.

Funding

Ontology-based Information Network to Support Vaccine ResearchR01AI081062 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI HE, YONGQUN · 2009 to 2012
$1.1M
Ontology-supported Integrative Analysis and Visualization of Vaccine-induced Pathways and NetworksUH2AI132931 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI HE, YONGQUN, WU, GUANMING · 2019 to 2020
$437k
NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI081062NIAID NIH HHS UH2 AI132931
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDifferent human responses to the same vaccine were frequently observed. For example, independent studies identified overlapping but different transcriptomic gene expression profiles in Yellow Fever vaccine 17D (YF-17D) immunized human subjects. Different experimental and analysis conditions were likely contributed to the observed differences. To investigate this issue, we developed a Vaccine Investigation Ontology (VIO), and applied VIO to classify the different variables and relations among these variables systematically. We then evaluated whether the ontological VIO modeling and VIO-based statistical analysis would contribute to the enhanced vaccine investigation studies and a better understanding of vaccine response mechanisms.

resultsOur VIO modeling identified many variables related to data processing and analysis such as normalization method, cut-off criteria, software settings including software version. The datasets from two previous studies on human responses to YF-17D vaccine, reported by Gaucher et al. (2008) and Querec et al. (2009), were re-analyzed. We first applied the same LIMMA statistical method to re-analyze the Gaucher data set and identified a big difference in terms of significantly differentiated gene lists compared to the original study. The different results were likely due to the LIMMA version and software package differences. Our second study re-analyzed both Gaucher and Querec data sets but with the same data processing and analysis pipeline. Significant differences in differential gene lists were also identified. In both studies, we found that Gene Ontology (GO) enrichment results had more overlapping than the gene lists and enriched pathway lists. The visualization of the identified GO hierarchical structures among the enriched GO terms and their associated ancestor terms using GOfox allowed us to find more associations among enriched but often different GO terms, demonstrating the usage of GO hierarchical relations enhance data analysis.

conclusionsThe ontology-based analysis framework supports standardized representation, integration, and analysis of heterogeneous data of host responses to vaccines. Our study also showed that differences in specific variables might explain different results drawn from similar studies.

Indexed as

VaccinesBiological OntologiesHumansSoftwareVaccinesLIMMAVaccine investigation ontologyVaccine ontologyVaccine responseYellow fever vaccineYF-17D

Identifiers

PMID31865910
PMCPMC6927110

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.