Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37478378›Full record

ArticleBriefings in bioinformatics2023

UNMF: a unified nonnegative matrix factorization for multi-dimensional omics data.

Ko Abe, Teppei Shimamura

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Briefings in bioinformatics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. 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

2 authors.

Ko AbeDivision of Systems Biology, Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, Showa-ku, 466-8550, Nagoya, Japan.
Teppei ShimamuraDivision of Systems Biology, Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, Showa-ku, 466-8550, Nagoya, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Factor analysis, ranging from principal component analysis to nonnegative matrix factorization, represents a foremost approach in analyzing multi-dimensional data to extract valuable patterns, and is increasingly being applied in the context of multi-dimensional omics datasets represented in tensor form. However, traditional analytical methods are heavily dependent on the format and structure of the data itself, and if these change even slightly, the analyst must change their data analysis strategy and techniques and spend a considerable amount of time on data preprocessing. Additionally, many traditional methods cannot be applied as-is in the presence of missing values in the data. We present a new statistical framework, unified nonnegative matrix factorization (UNMF), for finding informative patterns in messy biological data sets. UNMF is designed for tidy data format and structure, making data analysis easier and simplifying the development of data analysis tools. UNMF can handle a wide range of data structures and formats, and works seamlessly with tensor data including missing observations and repeated measurements. The usefulness of UNMF is demonstrated through its application to several multi-dimensional omics data, offering user-friendly and unified features for analysis and integration. Its application holds great potential for the life science community. UNMF is implemented with R and is available from GitHub (https://github.com/abikoushi/moltenNMF).

Indexed as

AlgorithmsMultiomicsFactor Analysis, StatisticalPrincipal Component AnalysisBayesian statisticsfactor analysisgene expression analysismetagenomemulti-dimensional datanonnegative matrix factorization

Identifiers

PMID37478378
PMCPMC10516365

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.