Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41665236›Full record

ArticleStatistics in medicine2026

Benchmarking Sparse Variable Selection Methods for Genomic Data Analyses.

Hema Sri Sai Kollipara, Tapabrata Maiti, Sanjukta Chakraborty, Samiran Sinha

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Statistics in medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

4 authors.

Hema Sri Sai KolliparaDepartment of Statistics & Probability, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0004-1953-523X
Tapabrata MaitiDepartment of Statistics & Probability, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, USA.
Sanjukta ChakrabortyDepartment of Medical Physiology, Texas A&M Health Science Center, College of Medicine, Bryan, Texas, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4869-3198
Samiran SinhaDepartment of Statistics, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8525-4741

Funding

Development of statistical and computational tools to analyze rhythmic gene expressions for a deeper understanding of circadian rhythmsR21HL181700 · NHLBI · TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY · PI SINHA, SAMIRAN · 2025 to 2025
$217k
NHLBI NIH HHS R21 HL181700NIH HHS R21HL181700
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genomics and other studies encounter many features and a selection of essential features with high accuracy is desired. In recent years, there has been a significant advancement in the use of Bayesian inference for variable (or feature) selection. However, there needs to be more practical information regarding their implementation and assessment of their relative performance. Our goal in this paper is to perform a comparative analysis of approaches, mainly from different Bayesian genres that apply to genomic analysis. In particular, we are examining how well shrinkage, global-local, and mixture priors, SUSIE, and a simple two-step procedure-namely, RFSFS, which we propose-perform in terms of several metrics: FDR, FNR, F-score, and mean squared prediction error under various simulation scenarios. There is no single method that outperforms others uniformly across all scenarios and in terms of variable selection and prediction performance metrics. So, we order the methods based on the average ranking across different scenarios. We found LASSO, spike-and-slab prior with normal slab (SN), and RFSFS are the most competitive methods for FDR and F-score when features are uncorrelated. When features are correlated, SN, SuSIE, and RFSFS are the most competitive methods for FDR whereas LASSO has an edge over SuSIE in terms of F-score. For illustration, we have applied these methods to analyzed The Cancer Genome Atlas Program (TCGA) renal cell carcinoma (RCC) data and have offered methodological direction.

Indexed as

BenchmarkingGenomicsAlgorithmsBayes TheoremComputer SimulationHumansKidney NeoplasmsModels, StatisticalBayesian variable selectionfalse negativesfalse positivespredictionregularized regressionRNA sequence data

Identifiers

PMID41665236
PMCPMC12888550

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.