ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2024
Processing-bias correction with DEBIAS-M improves cross-study generalization of microbiome-based prediction models.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Every step in common microbiome profiling protocols has variable efficiency for each microbe. For example, different DNA extraction kits may have different efficiency for Gram-positive and -negative bacteria. These variable efficiencies, combined with technical variation, create strong processing biases, which impede the identification of signals that are reproducible across studies and the development of generalizable and biologically interpretable prediction models. "Batch-correction" methods have been used to alleviate these issues computationally with some success. However, many make strong parametric assumptions which do not necessarily apply to microbiome data or processing biases, or require the use of an outcome variable, which risks overfitting. Lastly and importantly, existing transformations used to correct microbiome data are largely non-interpretable, and could, for example, introduce values to features that were initially mostly zeros. Altogether, processing bias currently compromises our ability to glean robust and generalizable biological insights from microbiome data. Here, we present DEBIAS-M (
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.