↓ Skip to main content

Gene set analysis using sufficient dimension reduction

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

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 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
Gene set analysis using sufficient dimension reduction
Published in
BMC Bioinformatics, February 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12859-016-0928-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Huey-Miin Hsueh, Chen-An Tsai

Abstract

Gene set analysis (GSA) aims to evaluate the association between the expression of biological pathways, or a priori defined gene sets, and a particular phenotype. Numerous GSA methods have been proposed to assess the enrichment of sets of genes. However, most methods are developed with respect to a specific alternative scenario, such as a differential mean pattern or a differential coexpression. Moreover, a very limited number of methods can handle either binary, categorical, or continuous phenotypes. In this paper, we develop two novel GSA tests, called SDRs, based on the sufficient dimension reduction technique, which aims to capture sufficient information about the relationship between genes and the phenotype. The advantages of our proposed methods are that they allow for categorical and continuous phenotypes, and they are also able to identify a variety of enriched gene sets. Through simulation studies, we compared the type I error and power of SDRs with existing GSA methods for binary, triple, and continuous phenotypes. We found that SDR methods adequately control the type I error rate at the pre-specified nominal level, and they have a satisfactory power to detect gene sets with differential coexpression and to test non-linear associations between gene sets and a continuous phenotype. In addition, the SDR methods were compared with seven widely-used GSA methods using two real microarray datasets for illustration. We concluded that the SDR methods outperform the others because of their flexibility with regard to handling different kinds of phenotypes and their power to detect a wide range of alternative scenarios. Our real data analysis highlights the differences between GSA methods for detecting enriched gene sets.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 %
Sweden 1 3%
Denmark 1 3%
Unknown 30 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 31%
Researcher 8 25%
Student > Bachelor 3 9%
Student > Master 3 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 6%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 3 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 31%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 22%
Computer Science 6 19%
Mathematics 2 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 6%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 4 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 08 February 2016.
All research outputs
#13,221,334
of 22,844,985 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#4,008
of 7,289 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#186,704
of 397,355 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#79
of 141 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,844,985 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,289 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 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 397,355 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 141 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.