↓ Skip to main content

To be or not to be associated: power study of four statistical modeling approaches to identify parasite associations in cross-sectional studies

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology, May 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
90 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
To be or not to be associated: power study of four statistical modeling approaches to identify parasite associations in cross-sectional studies
Published in
Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology, May 2014
DOI 10.3389/fcimb.2014.00062
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elise Vaumourin, Gwenaël Vourc'h, Sandra Telfer, Xavier Lambin, Diaeldin Salih, Ulrike Seitzer, Serge Morand, Nathalie Charbonnel, Muriel Vayssier-Taussat, Patrick Gasqui

Abstract

A growing number of studies are reporting simultaneous infections by parasites in many different hosts. The detection of whether these parasites are significantly associated is important in medicine and epidemiology. Numerous approaches to detect associations are available, but only a few provide statistical tests. Furthermore, they generally test for an overall detection of association and do not identify which parasite is associated with which other one. Here, we developed a new approach, the association screening approach, to detect the overall and the detail of multi-parasite associations. We studied the power of this new approach and of three other known ones (i.e., the generalized chi-square, the network and the multinomial GLM approaches) to identify parasite associations either due to parasite interactions or to confounding factors. We applied these four approaches to detect associations within two populations of multi-infected hosts: (1) rodents infected with Bartonella sp., Babesia microti and Anaplasma phagocytophilum and (2) bovine population infected with Theileria sp. and Babesia sp. We found that the best power is obtained with the screening model and the generalized chi-square test. The differentiation between associations, which are due to confounding factors and parasite interactions was not possible. The screening approach significantly identified associations between Bartonella doshiae and B. microti, and between T. parva, T. mutans, and T. velifera. Thus, the screening approach was relevant to test the overall presence of parasite associations and identify the parasite combinations that are significantly over- or under-represented. Unraveling whether the associations are due to real biological interactions or confounding factors should be further investigated. Nevertheless, in the age of genomics and the advent of new technologies, it is a considerable asset to speed up researches focusing on the mechanisms driving interactions between parasites.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 90 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Colombia 1 1%
Finland 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Denmark 1 1%
Spain 1 1%
Unknown 85 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 28 31%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 18%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 9%
Student > Master 7 8%
Professor 6 7%
Other 16 18%
Unknown 9 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 49 54%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 10 11%
Mathematics 4 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 3%
Environmental Science 3 3%
Other 8 9%
Unknown 13 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 27 May 2014.
All research outputs
#18,372,841
of 22,756,196 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology
#4,778
of 6,348 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#163,868
of 226,947 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology
#20
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,756,196 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,348 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.3. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% 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 226,947 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.