Cited by 358Bioinformatics and Genomic NetworksGene expression and cancer classificationGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies

A general modular framework for gene set enrichment analysis

Open access
Ackermann, Marit, Strimmer, Korbinian·2009·BMC Bioinformatics

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Analysis of microarray and other high-throughput data on the basis of gene sets, rather than individual genes, is becoming more important in genomic studies. Correspondingly, a large number of statistical approaches for detecting gene set enrichment have been proposed, but both the interrelations and the relative performance of the various methods are still very much unclear. RESULTS: We conduct an extensive survey of statistical approaches for gene set analysis and identify a common modular structure underlying most published methods. Based on this finding we propose a general framework for detecting gene set enrichment. This framework provides a meta-theory of gene set analysis that not only helps to gain a better understanding of the relative merits of each embedded approach but also facilitates a principled comparison and offers insights into the relative interplay of the methods. CONCLUSION: We use this framework to conduct a computer simulation comparing 261 different variants of gene set enrichment procedures and to analyze two experimental data sets. Based on the results we offer recommendations for best practices regarding the choice of effective procedures for gene set enrichment analysis.

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 · 10.1186/1471-2105-10-47

Cites

55 of 55 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?

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. Ackermann M A comparison of statistical methods for gene set enrichment analysis Diploma thesis 2008 Department of Statistics, Technische Universität Dortmund

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ackermann, M., & Strimmer, K.
Affiliations
  • Biotechnologisches Zentrum (DE)
  • Leipzig University (DE)
Corresponding author
Strimmer, Korbinian
Venue
BMC Bioinformatics
Published
2009-02-03
Volume
10
Issue
1
Pages
47-47
ISSN
1471-2105 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1983463159
Cited by
358
References
55
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 22 · 2016: 23 · 2015: 31 · 2014: 26 · 2013: 35 · 2012: 37
FWCI
13.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • BMC Bioinformatics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Bioinformatics and Genomic Networks
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gene expression and cancer classification
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Keywords
gene set enrichment analysis, modular framework, metatheory, comparison of statistical methods, microarray data, high-throughput genomic data, method benchmarking, best practices
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Animals, Computer Simulation, Humans, Models, Statistical, Oligonucleotide Array Sequence Analysis, Databases, Genetic

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