Cited by 131Bioinformatics and Genomic NetworksGene Regulatory Network AnalysisMicrobial Metabolic Engineering and Bioproduction

Designing and interpreting ‘multi-omic’ experiments that may change our understanding of biology

Open access
Haas, Robert, Zelezniak, Aleksej, Iacovacci, Jacopo, Kamrad, Stephan, Townsend, StJohn, Ralser, Markus·2017·Current Opinion in Systems Biology

Abstract

Most biological mechanisms involve more than one type of biomolecule, and hence operate not solely at the level of either genome, transcriptome, proteome, metabolome or ionome. Datasets resulting from single-omic analysis are rapidly increasing in throughput and quality, rendering multi-omic studies feasible. These should offer a comprehensive, structured and interactive overview of a biological mechanism. However, combining single-omic datasets in a meaningful manner has so far proved challenging, and the discovery of new biological information lags behind expectation. One reason is that experiments conducted in different laboratories can typically not to be combined without restriction. Second, the interpretation of multi-omic datasets represents a significant challenge by nature, as the biological datasets are heterogeneous not only for technical, but also for biological, chemical, and physical reasons. Here, multi-layer network theory and methods of artificial intelligence might contribute to solve these problems. For the efficient application of machine learning however, biological datasets need to become more systematic, more precise - and much larger. We conclude our review with basic guidelines for the successful set-up of a multi-omic experiment.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.coisb.2017.08.009

Cites

86 of 86 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Many multi-omic reviews concentrate on narrow sub-topics, including study design, workflows, software selection, and overfitting evaluation.

    “Currently, many of the multi-omic reviews are focussed on individual sub-topics.For example, designing studies (Haas et al., 2017;Hasin et al., 2017), setting up workflows (Kohl et al., 2014), choosing software tools (Misra et al., 2019) and evaluating overfitted performance (McCabe et al., 2020).”

    From Using machine learning approaches for multi-omics data analysis: A review (2021) · cites this paper as Haas et al., 2017

  • Other non-machine-learning challenges affect multi-omics studies, including study design, multi-site sample collection and management, data sharing and governance, visualisation, ethical standards, reproducibility and translation.

    “However, there are few other challenges related to multi-omics studies which are not ML related such as study design (Haas et al., 2017), multi-site sample collection & management (Pinu et al., 2019), multi-site data sharing and governance (Saulnier et al., 2019), visualisation (Mougin et al., 2018), ethical standards (Lévesque et al., 2018), and finally making the research reproducible (Conesa”

    From Using machine learning approaches for multi-omics data analysis: A review (2021) · cites this paper as Haas et al., 2017

  • In disease classification, rarer disease classes can create class imbalance in multi-omics datasets.

    “In disease classification, certain disease classes are rarer than others which can cause a class imbalance in the multi-omics dataset (Haas et al., 2017).”

    From Using machine learning approaches for multi-omics data analysis: A review (2021) · cites this paper as Haas et al., 2017

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [69]Vert J.-P. Reconstruction of biological networks by supervised machine learning approaches. In elements of computational systems biology 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 163 188

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Haas, R., Zelezniak, A., Iacovacci, J., Kamrad, S., Townsend, S., & Ralser, M.
Affiliations
  • The Francis Crick Institute (GB)
  • University of Cambridge (GB)
Corresponding author
Ralser, Markus
Venue
Current Opinion in Systems Biology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-12
Volume
6
Pages
37-45
ISSN
2452-3100 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2750804603
Cited by
131
References
86
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 25 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 5
FWCI
1.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Current Opinion in Systems Biology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Chalmers Research (Chalmers University of Technology) (submittedVersion)
  • Spiral (Imperial College London) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • The Francis Crick Institute (cc-by)
Funders
  • Francis Crick Institute
  • Cancer Research UK (FC001134)
  • UK Medical Research Council (FC001134)
  • Wellcome Trust (FC001134)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Bioinformatics and Genomic Networks
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gene Regulatory Network Analysis
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Microbial Metabolic Engineering and Bioproduction
Keywords
multi-omics, biological mechanisms, data heterogeneity, proteomics, metabolomics, transcriptomics, ionomics, systems biology

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review