Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37603575›Full record

ArticlePloS one2023

clusterBMA: Bayesian model averaging for clustering.

Owen Forbes, Edgar Santos-Fernandez, Paul Pao-Yen Wu, Hong-Bo Xie, Paul E Schwenn, Jim Lagopoulos, Lia Mills, Dashiell D Sacks, Daniel F Hermens, Kerrie Mengersen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

10 authors.

Owen ForbesCentre for Data Science, School of Mathematical Sciences, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-7634-8279
Edgar Santos-FernandezCentre for Data Science, School of Mathematical Sciences, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Paul Pao-Yen WuCentre for Data Science, School of Mathematical Sciences, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-5960-8203
Hong-Bo XieCentre for Data Science, School of Mathematical Sciences, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Paul E SchwennUQ Poche Centre for Indigenous Health, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Jim LagopoulosThompson Institute, University of the Sunshine Coast, Birtinya, QLD, Australia.
Lia MillsThompson Institute, University of the Sunshine Coast, Birtinya, QLD, Australia.
Dashiell D SacksThompson Institute, University of the Sunshine Coast, Birtinya, QLD, Australia.
Daniel F HermensThompson Institute, University of the Sunshine Coast, Birtinya, QLD, Australia.
Kerrie MengersenCentre for Data Science, School of Mathematical Sciences, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Various methods have been developed to combine inference across multiple sets of results for unsupervised clustering, within the ensemble clustering literature. The approach of reporting results from one 'best' model out of several candidate clustering models generally ignores the uncertainty that arises from model selection, and results in inferences that are sensitive to the particular model and parameters chosen. Bayesian model averaging (BMA) is a popular approach for combining results across multiple models that offers some attractive benefits in this setting, including probabilistic interpretation of the combined cluster structure and quantification of model-based uncertainty. In this work we introduce clusterBMA, a method that enables weighted model averaging across results from multiple unsupervised clustering algorithms. We use clustering internal validation criteria to develop an approximation of the posterior model probability, used for weighting the results from each model. From a combined posterior similarity matrix representing a weighted average of the clustering solutions across models, we apply symmetric simplex matrix factorisation to calculate final probabilistic cluster allocations. In addition to outperforming other ensemble clustering methods on simulated data, clusterBMA offers unique features including probabilistic allocation to averaged clusters, combining allocation probabilities from 'hard' and 'soft' clustering algorithms, and measuring model-based uncertainty in averaged cluster allocation. This method is implemented in an accompanying R package of the same name. We use simulated datasets to explore the ability of the proposed technique to identify robust integrated clusters with varying levels of separation between subgroups, and with varying numbers of clusters between models. Benchmarking accuracy against four other ensemble methods previously demonstrated to be highly effective in the literature, clusterBMA matches or exceeds the performance of competing approaches under various conditions of dimensionality and cluster separation. clusterBMA substantially outperformed other ensemble methods for high dimensional simulated data with low cluster separation, with 1.16 to 7.12 times better performance as measured by the Adjusted Rand Index. We also explore the performance of this approach through a case study that aims to identify probabilistic clusters of individuals based on electroencephalography (EEG) data. In applied settings for clustering individuals based on health data, the features of probabilistic allocation and measurement of model-based uncertainty in averaged clusters are useful for clinical relevance and statistical communication.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsBenchmarkingBayes TheoremClinical RelevanceCluster AnalysisHumans

Identifiers

PMID37603575
PMCPMC10441802

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.