Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36980868›Full record

ArticleGenes2023

Cell Type Annotation Model Selection: General-Purpose vs. Pattern-Aware Feature Gene Selection in Single-Cell RNA-Seq Data.

Akram Vasighizaker, Yash Trivedi, Luis Rueda

Full text read
In one paragraph

Article in Genes, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

3 authors.

Akram VasighizakerSchool of Computer Science, University of Windsor, Windsor, ON N9B 3P4, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-1916-2179
Yash TrivediSchool of Computer Science, University of Windsor, Windsor, ON N9B 3P4, Canada.
Luis RuedaSchool of Computer Science, University of Windsor, Windsor, ON N9B 3P4, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-7988-2058

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With the advances in high-throughput sequencing technology, an increasing amount of research in revealing heterogeneity among cells has been widely performed. Differences between individual cells' functionality are determined based on the differences in the gene expression profiles. Although the observations indicate a great performance of clustering methods, manual annotation of the clusters of cells is a challenge yet to be addressed more scalable and faster. On the other hand, due to the lack of enough labelled datasets, just a few supervised techniques have been used in cell type identification, and they obtained more robust results compared to clustering methods. A recent study showed that a complementary step of feature selection helped support vector machine (SVM) to outperform other classifiers in different scenarios. In this article, we compare and evaluate the performance of two state-of-the-art supervised methods, XGBoost and SVM, with information gain as a feature selection method. The results of the experiments on three standard scRNA-seq datasets indicate that XGBoost automatically annotates cell types in a simpler and more scalable framework. Additionally, it sheds light on the potential use of boosting tree approaches combined with deep neural networks to capture underlying information of single-cell RNA-Seq data more effectively. It can be used to identify marker genes and other applications in biological studies.

Indexed as

Single-Cell AnalysisSingle-Cell Gene Expression AnalysisHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingSequence Analysis, RNATranscriptomecell type annotationdomain-specific featuresfeature selectiongradient boostingscRNA-seq data

Identifiers

PMID36980868
PMCPMC10048047

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
measurements read12
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.