↓ Skip to main content

NBLDA: negative binomial linear discriminant analysis for RNA-Seq data

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Bioinformatics, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (81st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
38 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
60 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
NBLDA: negative binomial linear discriminant analysis for RNA-Seq data
Published in
BMC Bioinformatics, September 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12859-016-1208-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kai Dong, Hongyu Zhao, Tiejun Tong, Xiang Wan

Abstract

RNA-sequencing (RNA-Seq) has become a powerful technology to characterize gene expression profiles because it is more accurate and comprehensive than microarrays. Although statistical methods that have been developed for microarray data can be applied to RNA-Seq data, they are not ideal due to the discrete nature of RNA-Seq data. The Poisson distribution and negative binomial distribution are commonly used to model count data. Recently, Witten (Annals Appl Stat 5:2493-2518, 2011) proposed a Poisson linear discriminant analysis for RNA-Seq data. The Poisson assumption may not be as appropriate as the negative binomial distribution when biological replicates are available and in the presence of overdispersion (i.e., when the variance is larger than or equal to the mean). However, it is more complicated to model negative binomial variables because they involve a dispersion parameter that needs to be estimated. In this paper, we propose a negative binomial linear discriminant analysis for RNA-Seq data. By Bayes' rule, we construct the classifier by fitting a negative binomial model, and propose some plug-in rules to estimate the unknown parameters in the classifier. The relationship between the negative binomial classifier and the Poisson classifier is explored, with a numerical investigation of the impact of dispersion on the discriminant score. Simulation results show the superiority of our proposed method. We also analyze two real RNA-Seq data sets to demonstrate the advantages of our method in real-world applications. We have developed a new classifier using the negative binomial model for RNA-seq data classification. Our simulation results show that our proposed classifier has a better performance than existing works. The proposed classifier can serve as an effective tool for classifying RNA-seq data. Based on the comparison results, we have provided some guidelines for scientists to decide which method should be used in the discriminant analysis of RNA-Seq data. R code is available at http://www.comp.hkbu.edu.hk/~xwan/NBLDA.R or https://github.com/yangchadam/NBLDA.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Denmark 1 2%
Germany 1 2%
Unknown 58 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 25%
Researcher 10 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 12%
Student > Master 7 12%
Student > Bachelor 6 10%
Other 7 12%
Unknown 8 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 19 32%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 17%
Computer Science 8 13%
Mathematics 4 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 3%
Other 7 12%
Unknown 10 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 September 2016.
All research outputs
#3,402,195
of 23,577,761 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#1,218
of 7,418 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#58,478
of 324,167 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#22
of 121 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,761 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,418 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 324,167 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 121 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.