ArticleResearch in computational molecular biology : ... Annual International Conference, RECOMB ... : proceedings. RECOMB (Conference : 2005- )
Efficient Analysis of Annotation Colocalization Accounting for Genomic Contexts.
Article in Research in computational molecular biology : ... Annual International Conference, RECOMB ... : proceedings. RECOMB (Conference : 2005- ). 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
- Update of
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
An annotation is a set of genomic intervals sharing a particular function or property. Examples include genes, conserved elements, and epigenetic modifications. A common task is to compare two annotations to determine if one is enriched or depleted in the regions covered by the other. We study the problem of assigning statistical significance to such a comparison based on a null model representing two random unrelated annotations. To incorporate more background information into such analyses and avoid biased results, we propose a new null model based on a Markov chain which differentiates among several genomic contexts. These contexts can capture various confounding factors, such as GC content or sequencing gaps. We then develop a new algorithm for estimating p-values by computing the exact expectation and variance of the test statistic and then estimating the p-value using a normal approximation. Compared to the previous algorithm by Gafurov et al., the new algorithm provides three advances: (1) the running time is improved from quadratic to linear or quasi-linear, (2) the algorithm can handle two different test statistics, and (3) the algorithm can handle both simple and context-dependent Markov chain null models. We demonstrate the efficiency and accuracy of our algorithm on synthetic and real data sets, including the recent human telomere-to-telomere assembly. In particular, our algorithm computed p-values for 450 pairs of human genome annotations using 24 threads in under three hours. The use of genomic contexts to correct for GC-bias also resulted in the reversal of some previously published findings.
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.