ArticleBioinformatics advances2023
Detecting biased validation of predictive models in the positive-unlabeled setting: disease gene prioritization case study.
Article in Bioinformatics advances, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Identifying Adaptive Footprints in the Presence of Demographic Uncertainty.Genome biology and evolution · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Motivation: Positive-unlabeled data consists of points with either positive or unknown labels. It is widespread in medical, genetic, and biological settings, creating a high demand for predictive positive-unlabeled models. The performance of such models is usually estimated using validation sets, assumed to be selected completely at random (SCAR) from known positive examples. For certain metrics, this assumption enables unbiased performance estimation when treating positive-unlabeled data as positive/negative. However, the SCAR assumption is often adopted without proper justifications, simply for the sake of convenience. Results: We provide an algorithm that under the weak assumptions of a lower bound on the number of positive examples can test for the violation of the SCAR assumption. Applying it to the problem of gene prioritization for complex genetic traits, we illustrate that the SCAR assumption is often violated there, causing the inflation of performance estimates, which we refer to as validation bias. We estimate the potential impact of validation bias on performance estimation. Our analysis reveals that validation bias is widespread in gene prioritization data and can significantly overestimate the performance of models. This finding elucidates the discrepancy between the reported good performance of models and their limited practical applications. Availability and implementation: Python code with examples of application of the validation bias detection algorithm is available at github.com/ArtomovLab/ValidationBias.
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.