Literature DB >> 12835273

A comparison of parametric versus permutation methods with applications to general and temporal microarray gene expression data.

Ronghui Xu1, Xiaochun Li.   

Abstract

MOTIVATION: In analyses of microarray data with a design of different biological conditions, ranking genes by their differential 'importance' is often desired so that biologists can focus research on a small subset of genes that are most likely related to the experiment conditions. Permutation methods are often recommended and used, in place of their parametric counterparts, due to the small sample sizes of microarray experiments and possible non-normality of the data. The recommendations, however, are based on classical knowledge in the hypothesis test setting.
RESULTS: We explore the relationship between hypothesis testing and gene ranking. We indicate that the permutation method does not provide a metric for the distance between two underlying distributions. In our simulation studies permutation methods tend to be equally or less accurate than parametric methods in ranking genes. This is partially due to the discreteness of the permutation distributions, as well as the non-metric property. In data analysis the variability in ranking genes can be assessed by bootstrap. It turns out that the variability is much lower for permutation than parametric methods, which agrees with the known robustness of permutation methods to individual outliers in the data.

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12835273     DOI: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btg155

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Bioinformatics        ISSN: 1367-4803            Impact factor:   6.937


  7 in total

Review 1.  Challenges and approaches to statistical design and inference in high-dimensional investigations.

Authors:  Gary L Gadbury; Karen A Garrett; David B Allison
Journal:  Methods Mol Biol       Date:  2009

2.  Electroconvulsive seizures regulate gene expression of distinct neurotrophic signaling pathways.

Authors:  C Anthony Altar; Pascal Laeng; Linda W Jurata; Jeffrey A Brockman; Andrew Lemire; Jeffrey Bullard; Yury V Bukhman; Theresa A Young; Vinod Charles; Michael G Palfreyman
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2004-03-17       Impact factor: 6.167

3.  Randomization techniques for assessing the significance of gene periodicity results.

Authors:  Aleksi Kallio; Niko Vuokko; Markus Ojala; Niina Haiminen; Heikki Mannila
Journal:  BMC Bioinformatics       Date:  2011-08-09       Impact factor: 3.169

4.  A novel method for cross-species gene expression analysis.

Authors:  Erik Kristiansson; Tobias Österlund; Lina Gunnarsson; Gabriella Arne; D G Joakim Larsson; Olle Nerman
Journal:  BMC Bioinformatics       Date:  2013-02-27       Impact factor: 3.169

5.  Evaluating reproducibility of differential expression discoveries in microarray studies by considering correlated molecular changes.

Authors:  Min Zhang; Lin Zhang; Jinfeng Zou; Chen Yao; Hui Xiao; Qing Liu; Jing Wang; Dong Wang; Chenguang Wang; Zheng Guo
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2009-05-05       Impact factor: 6.937

6.  Improving the statistical detection of regulated genes from microarray data using intensity-based variance estimation.

Authors:  Jason Comander; Sripriya Natarajan; Michael A Gimbrone; Guillermo García-Cardeña
Journal:  BMC Genomics       Date:  2004-02-27       Impact factor: 3.969

7.  A network-based method to evaluate quality of reproducibility of differential expression in cancer genomics studies.

Authors:  Robin Li; Xiao Lin; Haijiang Geng; Zhihui Li; Jiabing Li; Tao Lu; Fangrong Yan
Journal:  Oncotarget       Date:  2015-12-29
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.