ArticleBriefings in bioinformatics2024
Mediation analysis in longitudinal study with high-dimensional methylation mediators.
Article in Briefings in bioinformatics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Mediation analysis has been widely utilized to identify potential pathways connecting exposures and outcomes. However, there remains a lack of analytical methods for high-dimensional mediation analysis in longitudinal data. To tackle this concern, we proposed an effective and novel approach with variable selection and the indirect effect (IE) assessment based on both linear mixed-effect model and generalized estimating equation. Initially, we employ sure independence screening to reduce the dimension of candidate mediators. Subsequently, we implement the Sobel test with the Bonferroni correction for IE hypothesis testing. Through extensive simulation studies, we demonstrate the performance of our proposed procedure with a higher F$_{1}$ score (0.8056 and 0.9983 at sample sizes of 150 and 500, respectively) compared with the linear method (0.7779 and 0.9642 at the same sample sizes), along with more accurate parameter estimation and a significantly lower false discovery rate. Moreover, we apply our methodology to explore the mediation mechanisms involving over 730 000 DNA methylation sites with potential effects between the paternal body mass index (BMI) and offspring growing BMI in the Shanghai sleeping birth cohort data, leading to the identification of two previously undiscovered mediating CpG sites.
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.