Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36095183›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2022

Cooperative learning for multiview analysis.

Daisy Yi Ding, Shuangning Li, Balasubramanian Narasimhan, Robert Tibshirani

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed
–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

38 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Integrative Analysis of Multimodal Omics Data.Annual review of statistics and its application · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Neurodatascience: Past, Present, and Future.Data science in science · 2026
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Bayesian Transfer Learning.Statistical science : a review journal of the Institute of Mathematical Statistics · 2025
    Article
  14. Omic Risk Scores are Associated with COPD-related Traits Across Three Cohorts.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Assessing polyomic risk to predict Alzheimer's disease using a machine learning model.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2024
    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

4 authors.

Daisy Yi DingDepartment of Biomedical Data Science, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305.ORCID 0000-0003-2914-9557
Shuangning LiDepartment of Statistics, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305.
Balasubramanian NarasimhanDepartment of Biomedical Data Science, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305.
Robert TibshiraniDepartment of Biomedical Data Science, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305.

Funding

Stanford Center for Clinical & Translational Education and Research (Spectrum)UL1TR003142 · NCATS · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI O'HARA, RUTH M · 2019 to 2023
$45.0M
New Statistical Methods for Medical Signals and ImagesR01EB001988 · NIBIB · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI JOHNSTONE, IAIN M · 2003 to 2018
$6.1M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR003142NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB001988
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We propose a method for supervised learning with multiple sets of features ("views"). The multiview problem is especially important in biology and medicine, where "-omics" data, such as genomics, proteomics, and radiomics, are measured on a common set of samples. "Cooperative learning" combines the usual squared-error loss of predictions with an "agreement" penalty to encourage the predictions from different data views to agree. By varying the weight of the agreement penalty, we get a continuum of solutions that include the well-known early and late fusion approaches. Cooperative learning chooses the degree of agreement (or fusion) in an adaptive manner, using a validation set or cross-validation to estimate test set prediction error. One version of our fitting procedure is modular, where one can choose different fitting mechanisms (e.g., lasso, random forests, boosting, or neural networks) appropriate for different data views. In the setting of cooperative regularized linear regression, the method combines the lasso penalty with the agreement penalty, yielding feature sparsity. The method can be especially powerful when the different data views share some underlying relationship in their signals that can be exploited to boost the signals. We show that cooperative learning achieves higher predictive accuracy on simulated data and real multiomics examples of labor-onset prediction. By leveraging aligned signals and allowing flexible fitting mechanisms for different modalities, cooperative learning offers a powerful approach to multiomics data fusion.

Indexed as

GenomicsNeural Networks, ComputerSupervised Machine Learningdata fusionmultiomicssparsitysupervised learning

Identifiers

PMID36095183
PMCPMC9499553

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.