ArticlePloS one2020
ANOVA-HD: Analysis of variance when both input and output layers are high-dimensional.
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 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mapping the relative accuracy of cross-ancestry prediction.Nature communications · 2024Article
- Genomic prediction using information across years with epistatic models and dimension reduction via haplotype blocks.PloS one · 2023Article
- Development and validation of a horse reference panel for genotype imputation.Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Modern genomic data sets often involve multiple data-layers (e.g., DNA-sequence, gene expression), each of which itself can be high-dimensional. The biological processes underlying these data-layers can lead to intricate multivariate association patterns. We propose and evaluate two methods to determine the proportion of variance of an output data set that can be explained by an input data set when both data panels are high dimensional. Our approach uses random-effects models to estimate the proportion of variance of vectors in the linear span of the output set that can be explained by regression on the input set. We consider a method based on an orthogonal basis (Eigen-ANOVA) and one that uses random vectors (Monte Carlo ANOVA, MC-ANOVA) in the linear span of the output set. Using simulations, we show that the MC-ANOVA method gave nearly unbiased estimates. Estimates produced by Eigen-ANOVA were also nearly unbiased, except when the shared variance was very high (e.g., >0.9). We demonstrate the potential insight that can be obtained from the use of MC-ANOVA and Eigen-ANOVA by applying these two methods to the study of multi-locus linkage disequilibrium in chicken (Gallus gallus) genomes and to the assessment of inter-dependencies between gene expression, methylation, and copy-number-variants in data from breast cancer tumors from humans (Homo sapiens). Our analyses reveal that in chicken breeding populations ~50,000 evenly-spaced SNPs are enough to fully capture the span of whole-genome-sequencing genomes. In the study of multi-omic breast cancer data, we found that the span of copy-number-variants can be fully explained using either methylation or gene expression data and that roughly 74% of the variance in gene expression can be predicted from methylation data.
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.