Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38456127›Full record

ArticleBioinformatics advances2024

TOSCCA: a framework for interpretation and testing of sparse canonical correlations.

Nuria Senar, Mark van de Wiel, Aeilko H Zwinderman, Michel H Hof

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bioinformatics advances, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

4 authors.

Nuria SenarDepartment of Epidemiology & Data Science, Amsterdam School of Public Health, Amsterdam UMC, 1105 AZ Nord-Holland, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1004-5785
Mark van de WielDepartment of Epidemiology & Data Science, Amsterdam School of Public Health, Amsterdam UMC, 1105 AZ Nord-Holland, The Netherlands.
Aeilko H ZwindermanDepartment of Epidemiology & Data Science, Amsterdam School of Public Health, Amsterdam UMC, 1105 AZ Nord-Holland, The Netherlands.
Michel H HofDepartment of Epidemiology & Data Science, Amsterdam School of Public Health, Amsterdam UMC, 1105 AZ Nord-Holland, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Summary: In clinical and biomedical research, multiple high-dimensional datasets are nowadays routinely collected from omics and imaging devices. Multivariate methods, such as Canonical Correlation Analysis (CCA), integrate two (or more) datasets to discover and understand underlying biological mechanisms. For an explorative method like CCA, interpretation is key. We present a sparse CCA method based on soft-thresholding that produces near-orthogonal components, allows for browsing over various sparsity levels, and permutation-based hypothesis testing. Our soft-thresholding approach avoids tuning of a penalty parameter. Such tuning is computationally burdensome and may render unintelligible results. In addition, unlike alternative approaches, our method is less dependent on the initialization. We examined the performance of our approach with simulations and illustrated its use on real cancer genomics data from drug sensitivity screens. Moreover, we compared its performance to Penalized Matrix Analysis (PMA), which is a popular alternative of sparse CCA with a focus on yielding interpretable results. Compared to PMA, our method offers improved interpretability of the results, while not compromising, or even improving, signal discovery. Availability and implementation: The software and simulation framework are available at https://github.com/nuria-sv/toscca.

Identifiers

PMID38456127
PMCPMC10919946

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.