Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42221836›Full record

ArticleSankhya. Series A. (2008)2022

Covariate-Adjusted Inference for Differential Analysis of High-Dimensional Networks.

Aaron Hudson, Ali Shojaie

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sankhya. Series A. (2008), 2022. 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

2 authors.

Aaron HudsonUniversity of Washington, Seattle, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9731-2224
Ali ShojaieUniversity of Washington, Seattle, USA.

Funding

Machine Learning Tools for Discovery and Analysis of Active Metabolic PathwaysR01GM114029 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI SHOJAIE, ALI · 2016 to 2020
$1.7M
NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM114029
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Differences between biological networks corresponding to disease conditions can help delineate the underlying disease mechanisms. Existing methods for differential network analysis do not account for dependence of networks on covariates. As a result, these approaches may detect spurious differential connections induced by the effect of the covariates on both the disease condition and the network. To address this issue, we propose a general covariate-adjusted test for differential network analysis. Our method assesses differential network connectivity by testing the null hypothesis that the network is the same for individuals who have identical covariates and only differ in disease status. We show empirically in a simulation study that the covariate-adjusted test exhibits improved type-I error control compared with naïve hypothesis testing procedures that do not account for covariates. We additionally show that there are settings in which our proposed methodology provides improved power to detect differential connections. We illustrate our method by applying it to detect differences in breast cancer gene co-expression networks by subtype.

Indexed as

62H22 (primary)62J07 (secondary)ConfoundingDe-biased LASSODifferential networkExponential familyHigh-dimensionalPenalized likelihood

Identifiers

PMID42221836
PMCPMC13221208

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.