↓ Skip to main content

Link prediction in drug-target interactions network using similarity indices

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Bioinformatics, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (51st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
100 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
110 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Link prediction in drug-target interactions network using similarity indices
Published in
BMC Bioinformatics, January 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12859-017-1460-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yiding Lu, Yufan Guo, Anna Korhonen

Abstract

In silico drug-target interaction (DTI) prediction plays an integral role in drug repositioning: the discovery of new uses for existing drugs. One popular method of drug repositioning is network-based DTI prediction, which uses complex network theory to predict DTIs from a drug-target network. Currently, most network-based DTI prediction is based on machine learning - methods such as Restricted Boltzmann Machines (RBM) or Support Vector Machines (SVM). These methods require additional information about the characteristics of drugs, targets and DTIs, such as chemical structure, genome sequence, binding types, causes of interactions, etc., and do not perform satisfactorily when such information is unavailable. We propose a new, alternative method for DTI prediction that makes use of only network topology information attempting to solve this problem. We compare our method for DTI prediction against the well-known RBM approach. We show that when applied to the MATADOR database, our approach based on node neighborhoods yield higher precision for high-ranking predictions than RBM when no information regarding DTI types is available. This demonstrates that approaches purely based on network topology provide a more suitable approach to DTI prediction in the many real-life situations where little or no prior knowledge is available about the characteristics of drugs, targets, or their interactions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 110 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 <1%
Unknown 109 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 19%
Researcher 14 13%
Student > Master 12 11%
Student > Bachelor 7 6%
Student > Postgraduate 7 6%
Other 20 18%
Unknown 29 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 31 28%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 5%
Mathematics 4 4%
Other 14 13%
Unknown 38 35%
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 23 February 2017.
All research outputs
#13,013,818
of 22,940,083 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#3,805
of 7,307 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#199,312
of 418,156 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#63
of 143 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,940,083 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,307 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% 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 418,156 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 143 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.