ArticleBioinformatics (Oxford, England)2024
Higher-order correction of persistent batch effects in correlation networks.
Article in Bioinformatics (Oxford, England), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Large-scale, interpretable gene regulatory network inference through biologically informed matrix factorization.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- PARROT: Phase-Altering Regulatory Rewiring Over Time.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- DataXflowGen for GenAI-driven model generation.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Local transcriptional covariation produces accurate estimates of cell phenotype.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- CorrAdjust unveils biologically relevant transcriptomic correlations by efficiently eliminating hidden confounders.Nucleic acids research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
motivationSystems biology analyses often use correlations in gene expression profiles to infer co-expression networks that are then used as input for gene regulatory network inference or to identify functional modules of co-expressed or putatively co-regulated genes. While systematic biases, including batch effects, are known to induce spurious associations and confound differential gene expression analyses (DE), the impact of batch effects on gene co-expression has not been fully explored. Methods have been developed to adjust expression values, ensuring conditional independence of mean and variance from batch or other covariates for each gene, resulting in improved fidelity of DE analysis. However, such adjustments do not address the potential for spurious differential co-expression (DC) between groups. Consequently, uncorrected, artifactual DC can skew the correlation structure, leading to the identification of false, non-biological associations, even when the input data are corrected using standard batch correction.
resultsIn this work, we demonstrate the persistence of confounders in covariance after standard batch correction using synthetic and real-world gene expression data examples. We then introduce Co-expression Batch Reduction Adjustment (COBRA), a method for computing a batch-corrected gene co-expression matrix based on estimating a conditional covariance matrix. COBRA estimates a reduced set of parameters expressing the co-expression matrix as a function of the sample covariates, allowing control for continuous and categorical covariates. COBRA is computationally efficient, leveraging the inherently modular structure of genomic data to estimate accurate gene regulatory associations and facilitate functional analysis for high-dimensional genomic data. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: COBRA is available under the GLP3 open source license in R and Python in netZoo (https://netzoo.github.io).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.