Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38701410›Full record

ArticleBriefings in bioinformatics2024

mbDecoda: a debiased approach to compositional data analysis for microbiome surveys.

Yuxuan Zong, Hongyu Zhao, Tao Wang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Briefings in bioinformatics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Yuxuan ZongDepartment of Bioinformatics and Biostatistics, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China.
Hongyu ZhaoSJTU-Yale Joint Center of Biostatistics and Data Science, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China.
Tao WangDepartment of Bioinformatics and Biostatistics, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China.

Funding

Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities and Neil Shen's SJTU Medical Research Fund of Shanghai Jiao Tong UniversityNational Natural Science Foundation of China 12222111
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Potentially pathogenic or probiotic microbes can be identified by comparing their abundance levels between healthy and diseased populations, or more broadly, by linking microbiome composition with clinical phenotypes or environmental factors. However, in microbiome studies, feature tables provide relative rather than absolute abundance of each feature in each sample, as the microbial loads of the samples and the ratios of sequencing depth to microbial load are both unknown and subject to considerable variation. Moreover, microbiome abundance data are count-valued, often over-dispersed and contain a substantial proportion of zeros. To carry out differential abundance analysis while addressing these challenges, we introduce mbDecoda, a model-based approach for debiased analysis of sparse compositions of microbiomes. mbDecoda employs a zero-inflated negative binomial model, linking mean abundance to the variable of interest through a log link function, and it accommodates the adjustment for confounding factors. To efficiently obtain maximum likelihood estimates of model parameters, an Expectation Maximization algorithm is developed. A minimum coverage interval approach is then proposed to rectify compositional bias, enabling accurate and reliable absolute abundance analysis. Through extensive simulation studies and analysis of real-world microbiome datasets, we demonstrate that mbDecoda compares favorably with state-of-the-art methods in terms of effectiveness, robustness and reproducibility.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsMicrobiotaData AnalysisHumansANCOMBias correctionDifferential abundance testingZero-inflated models

Identifiers

PMID38701410
PMCPMC11066923

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.