↓ Skip to main content

Prioritizing disease genes with an improved dual label propagation framework

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Bioinformatics, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
32 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Prioritizing disease genes with an improved dual label propagation framework
Published in
BMC Bioinformatics, February 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12859-018-2040-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yaogong Zhang, Jiahui Liu, Xiaohu Liu, Xin Fan, Yuxiang Hong, Yuan Wang, YaLou Huang, MaoQiang Xie

Abstract

Prioritizing disease genes is trying to identify potential disease causing genes for a given phenotype, which can be applied to reveal the inherited basis of human diseases and facilitate drug development. Our motivation is inspired by label propagation algorithm and the false positive protein-protein interactions that exist in the dataset. To the best of our knowledge, the false positive protein-protein interactions have not been considered before in disease gene prioritization. Label propagation has been successfully applied to prioritize disease causing genes in previous network-based methods. These network-based methods use basic label propagation, i.e. random walk, on networks to prioritize disease genes in different ways. However, all these methods can not deal with the situation in which plenty false positive protein-protein interactions exist in the dataset, because the PPI network is used as a fixed input in previous methods. This important characteristic of data source may cause a large deviation in results. A novel network-based framework IDLP is proposed to prioritize candidate disease genes. IDLP effectively propagates labels throughout the PPI network and the phenotype similarity network. It avoids the method falling when few disease genes are known. Meanwhile, IDLP models the bias caused by false positive protein interactions and other potential factors by treating the PPI network matrix and the phenotype similarity matrix as the matrices to be learnt. By amending the noises in training matrices, it improves the performance results significantly. We conduct extensive experiments over OMIM datasets, and IDLP has demonstrated its effectiveness compared with eight state-of-the-art approaches. The robustness of IDLP is also validated by doing experiments with disturbed PPI network. Furthermore, We search the literatures to verify the predicted new genes got by IDLP are associated with the given diseases, the high prediction accuracy shows IDLP can be a powerful tool to help biologists discover new disease genes. IDLP model is an effective method for disease gene prioritization, particularly for querying phenotypes without known associated genes, which would be greatly helpful for identifying disease genes for less studied phenotypes. https://github.com/nkiip/IDLP.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 32 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 6 19%
Student > Master 5 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 9%
Researcher 3 9%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 8 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 16%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 16%
Computer Science 4 13%
Engineering 3 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 6%
Other 5 16%
Unknown 8 25%
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 12 February 2018.
All research outputs
#18,345,702
of 23,577,761 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#6,094
of 7,418 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#312,817
of 442,177 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#84
of 117 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,761 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% 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 442,177 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 117 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.