ArticlePloS one2024
Multi-Input data ASsembly for joint Analysis (MIASA): A framework for the joint analysis of disjoint sets of variables.
Article in PloS one, 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The joint analysis of two datasets [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text] that describe the same phenomena (e.g. the cellular state), but measure disjoint sets of variables (e.g. mRNA vs. protein levels) is currently challenging. Traditional methods typically analyze single interaction patterns such as variance or covariance. However, problem-tailored external knowledge may contain multiple different information about the interaction between the measured variables. We introduce MIASA, a holistic framework for the joint analysis of multiple different variables. It consists of assembling multiple different information such as similarity vs. association, expressed in terms of interaction-scores or distances, for subsequent clustering/classification. In addition, our framework includes a novel qualitative Euclidean embedding method (qEE-Transition) which enables using Euclidean-distance/vector-based clustering/classification methods on datasets that have a non-Euclidean-based interaction structure. As an alternative to conventional optimization-based multidimensional scaling methods which are prone to uncertainties, our qEE-Transition generates a new vector representation for each element of the dataset union [Formula: see text] in a common Euclidean space while strictly preserving the original ordering of the assembled interaction-distances. To demonstrate our work, we applied the framework to three types of simulated datasets: samples from families of distributions, samples from correlated random variables, and time-courses of statistical moments for three different types of stochastic two-gene interaction models. We then compared different clustering methods with vs. without the qEE-Transition. For all examples, we found that the qEE-Transition followed by Ward clustering had superior performance compared to non-agglomerative clustering methods but had a varied performance against ultrametric-based agglomerative methods. We also tested the qEE-Transition followed by supervised and unsupervised machine learning methods and found promising results, however, more work is needed for optimal parametrization of these methods. As a future perspective, our framework points to the importance of more developments and validation of distance-distribution models aiming to capture multiple-complex interactions between different variables.
Indexed as
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.