↓ Skip to main content

A Hierarchical Poisson Log-Normal Model for Network Inference from RNA Sequencing Data

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, October 2013
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
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
65 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
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
A Hierarchical Poisson Log-Normal Model for Network Inference from RNA Sequencing Data
Published in
PLOS ONE, October 2013
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0077503
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mélina Gallopin, Andrea Rau, Florence Jaffrézic

Abstract

Gene network inference from transcriptomic data is an important methodological challenge and a key aspect of systems biology. Although several methods have been proposed to infer networks from microarray data, there is a need for inference methods able to model RNA-seq data, which are count-based and highly variable. In this work we propose a hierarchical Poisson log-normal model with a Lasso penalty to infer gene networks from RNA-seq data; this model has the advantage of directly modelling discrete data and accounting for inter-sample variance larger than the sample mean. Using real microRNA-seq data from breast cancer tumors and simulations, we compare this method to a regularized Gaussian graphical model on log-transformed data, and a Poisson log-linear graphical model with a Lasso penalty on power-transformed data. For data simulated with large inter-sample dispersion, the proposed model performs better than the other methods in terms of sensitivity, specificity and area under the ROC curve. These results show the necessity of methods specifically designed for gene network inference from RNA-seq data.

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 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 8%
Chile 1 2%
Germany 1 2%
Slovenia 1 2%
France 1 2%
Unknown 56 86%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 23 35%
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 32%
Other 2 3%
Professor 2 3%
Student > Bachelor 2 3%
Other 7 11%
Unknown 8 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 23 35%
Mathematics 11 17%
Computer Science 8 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 5%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 11 17%
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 06 August 2014.
All research outputs
#13,045,986
of 22,727,570 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#102,804
of 193,986 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#108,750
of 211,883 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#2,605
of 5,138 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,727,570 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 193,986 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.1. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% 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 211,883 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5,138 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.