↓ Skip to main content

DM-PhyClus: a Bayesian phylogenetic algorithm for infectious disease transmission cluster inference

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Bioinformatics, September 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
36 Mendeley
Title
DM-PhyClus: a Bayesian phylogenetic algorithm for infectious disease transmission cluster inference
Published in
BMC Bioinformatics, September 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12859-018-2347-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Luc Villandré, Aurélie Labbe, Bluma Brenner, Michel Roger, David A Stephens

Abstract

Conventional phylogenetic clustering approaches rely on arbitrary cutpoints applied a posteriori to phylogenetic estimates. Although in practice, Bayesian and bootstrap-based clustering tend to lead to similar estimates, they often produce conflicting measures of confidence in clusters. The current study proposes a new Bayesian phylogenetic clustering algorithm, which we refer to as DM-PhyClus (Dirichlet-Multinomial Phylogenetic Clustering), that identifies sets of sequences resulting from quick transmission chains, thus yielding easily-interpretable clusters, without using any ad hoc distance or confidence requirement. Simulations reveal that DM-PhyClus can outperform conventional clustering methods, as well as the Gap procedure, a pure distance-based algorithm, in terms of mean cluster recovery. We apply DM-PhyClus to a sample of real HIV-1 sequences, producing a set of clusters whose inference is in line with the conclusions of a previous thorough analysis. DM-PhyClus, by eliminating the need for cutpoints and producing sensible inference for cluster configurations, can facilitate transmission cluster detection. Future efforts to reduce incidence of infectious diseases, like HIV-1, will need reliable estimates of transmission clusters. It follows that algorithms like DM-PhyClus could serve to better inform public health strategies.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 36 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 31%
Researcher 6 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 11%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 6%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 6 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 14 39%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 11%
Computer Science 3 8%
Sports and Recreations 2 6%
Social Sciences 2 6%
Other 6 17%
Unknown 5 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 September 2018.
All research outputs
#14,694,615
of 25,522,520 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#4,045
of 7,713 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#172,783
of 348,513 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#52
of 105 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,522,520 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,713 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 348,513 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 105 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.