↓ Skip to main content

Prediction of missing common genes for disease pairs using network based module separation on incomplete human interactome

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Genomics, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
14 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
Prediction of missing common genes for disease pairs using network based module separation on incomplete human interactome
Published in
BMC Genomics, December 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12864-017-4272-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Pakeeza Akram, Li Liao

Abstract

Identification of common genes associated with comorbid diseases can be critical in understanding their pathobiological mechanism. This work presents a novel method to predict missing common genes associated with a disease pair. Searching for missing common genes is formulated as an optimization problem to minimize network based module separation from two subgraphs produced by mapping genes associated with disease onto the interactome. Using cross validation on more than 600 disease pairs, our method achieves significantly higher average receiver operating characteristic ROC Score of 0.95 compared to a baseline ROC score 0.60 using randomized data. Missing common genes prediction is aimed to complete gene set associated with comorbid disease for better understanding of biological intervention. It will also be useful for gene targeted therapeutics related to comorbid diseases. This method can be further considered for prediction of missing edges to complete the subgraph associated with disease pair.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 14 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 4 29%
Researcher 3 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 14%
Student > Master 2 14%
Student > Postgraduate 1 7%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 2 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 29%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 21%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 7%
Computer Science 1 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Unknown 3 21%
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 16 December 2017.
All research outputs
#15,485,255
of 23,011,300 outputs
Outputs from BMC Genomics
#6,724
of 10,697 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#266,805
of 439,982 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Genomics
#137
of 228 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,011,300 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,697 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 439,982 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 228 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.