ArticleBriefings in bioinformatics2025
Rank-based learning: a novel high-throughput algorithm resilient to missing data and effective for datasets with small sample size.
Article in Briefings in bioinformatics, 2025. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
High-throughput omics data present challenges for binary classification due to platform variability, batch effects, missing values, and high dimensionality. This study presents a novel Rank-Based Learning (RBL) method that leverages relative feature rankings to improve robustness and generalizability. We evaluated RBL against established methods like Logistic Regression (LR) and Random Forest (RF) using simulated data and two real-world plasma proteomics datasets: early-stage small cell lung cancer (SCLC) and duodenopancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (dpNET) in patients with Multiple Endocrine Neoplasia type 1 (MEN1). In simulation experiments, RBL outperformed LR under conditions involving batch effects, missing data, and varying numbers of true differential features. In SCLC, RBL yielded a test AUC of 0.76 (95% CI: 0.42-1.00), surpassing LR with Lasso (0.65 [95% CI: 0.47-0.84]) and RF with feature importance (0.59 [95% CI: 0.33-0.87]). In dpNET, RBL achieved an AUC of 0.83 (95% CI: 0.67-0.97) on the development set and 0.80 (95% CI: 0.54-0.98) on the test set, outperforming LR with Lasso (0.57 [95% CI: 0.40-0.77]) and RF with feature importance (0.53 [95% CI: 0.29-0.77]). By emphasizing feature ranking rather than absolute expression levels, RBL effectively mitigates the impact of non-biological variation. Overall, RBL improves the predictive accuracy of diagnostic models for complex diseases and provides a promising framework for developing more reliable and generalizable diagnostic tools from omics data, moving them closer to clinical application.
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.