Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31182005›Full record

ArticleBMC bioinformatics2019

Combining gene ontology with deep neural networks to enhance the clustering of single cell RNA-Seq data.

Jiajie Peng, Xiaoyu Wang, Xuequn Shang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Deep Reinforcement Learning for Data Association in Cell Tracking.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2020
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Jiajie PengSchool of Computer Science, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Xi'an, 710072, China.
Xiaoyu WangSchool of Computer Science, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Xi'an, 710072, China.
Xuequn ShangSchool of Computer Science, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Xi'an, 710072, China. shang@nwpu.edu.cn.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSingle cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) is applied to assay the individual transcriptomes of large numbers of cells. The gene expression at single-cell level provides an opportunity for better understanding of cell function and new discoveries in biomedical areas. To ensure that the single-cell based gene expression data are interpreted appropriately, it is crucial to develop new computational methods.

resultsIn this article, we try to re-construct a neural network based on Gene Ontology (GO) for dimension reduction of scRNA-seq data. By integrating GO with both unsupervised and supervised models, two novel methods are proposed, named GOAE (Gene Ontology AutoEncoder) and GONN (Gene Ontology Neural Network) respectively.

conclusionsThe evaluation results show that the proposed models outperform some state-of-the-art dimensionality reduction approaches. Furthermore, incorporating with GO, we provide an opportunity to interpret the underlying biological mechanism behind the neural network-based model.

Indexed as

Gene OntologyNeural Networks, ComputerAlgorithmsAnimalsBase SequenceCluster AnalysisDatabases, GeneticHumansMiceRNASequence Analysis, RNASingle-Cell AnalysisRNAAutoencoderGene ontologyNeural networkSingle cell RNA-seq data

Identifiers

PMID31182005
PMCPMC6557741

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.