↓ Skip to main content

Causal graph-based analysis of genome-wide association data in rheumatoid arthritis

Overview of attention for article published in Biology Direct, May 2011
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
45 Mendeley
connotea
1 Connotea
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
Causal graph-based analysis of genome-wide association data in rheumatoid arthritis
Published in
Biology Direct, May 2011
DOI 10.1186/1745-6150-6-25
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alexander V Alekseyenko, Nikita I Lytkin, Jizhou Ai, Bo Ding, Leonid Padyukov, Constantin F Aliferis, Alexander Statnikov

Abstract

GWAS owe their popularity to the expectation that they will make a major impact on diagnosis, prognosis and management of disease by uncovering genetics underlying clinical phenotypes. The dominant paradigm in GWAS data analysis so far consists of extensive reliance on methods that emphasize contribution of individual SNPs to statistical association with phenotypes. Multivariate methods, however, can extract more information by considering associations of multiple SNPs simultaneously. Recent advances in other genomics domains pinpoint multivariate causal graph-based inference as a promising principled analysis framework for high-throughput data. Designed to discover biomarkers in the local causal pathway of the phenotype, these methods lead to accurate and highly parsimonious multivariate predictive models. In this paper, we investigate the applicability of causal graph-based method TIE* to analysis of GWAS data. To test the utility of TIE*, we focus on anti-CCP positive rheumatoid arthritis (RA) GWAS datasets, where there is a general consensus in the community about the major genetic determinants of the disease.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 7%
Germany 1 2%
Thailand 1 2%
Unknown 40 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 13 29%
Student > Master 8 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 18%
Professor 5 11%
Other 4 9%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 3 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15 33%
Computer Science 7 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 11%
Engineering 3 7%
Physics and Astronomy 2 4%
Other 7 16%
Unknown 6 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 18 May 2015.
All research outputs
#17,286,379
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Biology Direct
#386
of 537 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#94,372
of 123,560 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biology Direct
#8
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 537 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.3. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 123,560 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.