↓ Skip to main content

A survey about methods dedicated to epistasis detection

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Genetics, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
132 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
195 Mendeley
citeulike
1 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 survey about methods dedicated to epistasis detection
Published in
Frontiers in Genetics, September 2015
DOI 10.3389/fgene.2015.00285
Pubmed ID
Authors

Clément Niel, Christine Sinoquet, Christian Dina, Ghislain Rocheleau

Abstract

During the past decade, findings of genome-wide association studies (GWAS) improved our knowledge and understanding of disease genetics. To date, thousands of SNPs have been associated with diseases and other complex traits. Statistical analysis typically looks for association between a phenotype and a SNP taken individually via single-locus tests. However, geneticists admit this is an oversimplified approach to tackle the complexity of underlying biological mechanisms. Interaction between SNPs, namely epistasis, must be considered. Unfortunately, epistasis detection gives rise to analytic challenges since analyzing every SNP combination is at present impractical at a genome-wide scale. In this review, we will present the main strategies recently proposed to detect epistatic interactions, along with their operating principle. Some of these methods are exhaustive, such as multifactor dimensionality reduction, likelihood ratio-based tests or receiver operating characteristic curve analysis; some are non-exhaustive, such as machine learning techniques (random forests, Bayesian networks) or combinatorial optimization approaches (ant colony optimization, computational evolution system).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 195 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 2%
Spain 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 190 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 43 22%
Student > Master 38 19%
Researcher 30 15%
Student > Bachelor 14 7%
Other 7 4%
Other 27 14%
Unknown 36 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 49 25%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 34 17%
Computer Science 26 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 4%
Neuroscience 7 4%
Other 27 14%
Unknown 44 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 15 October 2015.
All research outputs
#6,424,790
of 22,826,360 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Genetics
#1,969
of 11,815 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#76,202
of 267,231 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Genetics
#14
of 64 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,826,360 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,815 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its peers.
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 267,231 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 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 64 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.