ArticlePloS one2020
Equiprobable discrete models of site-specific substitution rates underestimate the extent of rate variability.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
It is standard practice to model site-to-site variability of substitution rates by discretizing a continuous distribution into a small number, K, of equiprobable rate categories. We demonstrate that the variance of this discretized distribution has an upper bound determined solely by the choice of K and the mean of the distribution. This bound can introduce biases into statistical inference, especially when estimating parameters governing site-to-site variability of substitution rates. Applications to two large collections of sequence alignments demonstrate that this upper bound is often reached in analyses of real data. When parameter estimation is of primary interest, additional rate categories or more flexible modeling methods should be considered.
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.