Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (33)
Language
- English (33)
Has Fulltext
- yes (33)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (33)
Keywords
- data science (5)
- Data science (4)
- artificial intelligence (4)
- digital medicine (4)
- Machine-learning (3)
- machine-learning (3)
- Biomedical informatics (2)
- Data processing (2)
- Functional clustering (2)
- Olfactory system (2)
Institute
- Medizin (30)
- Pharmazie (3)
- Biochemie und Chemie (1)
- Biochemie, Chemie und Pharmazie (1)
- Biowissenschaften (1)
The Gini index is a measure of the inequality of a distribution that can be derived from Lorenz curves. While commonly used in, e.g., economic research, it suffers from ambiguity via lack of Lorenz dominance preservation. Here, investigation of large sets of empirical distributions of incomes of the World’s countries over several years indicated firstly, that the Gini indices are centered on a value of 33.33% corresponding to the Gini index of the uniform distribution and secondly, that the Lorenz curves of these distributions are consistent with Lorenz curves of log-normal distributions. This can be employed to provide a Lorenz dominance preserving equivalent of the Gini index. Therefore, a modified measure based on log-normal approximation and standardization of Lorenz curves is proposed. The so-called UGini index provides a meaningful and intuitive standardization on the uniform distribution as this characterizes societies that provide equal chances. The novel UGini index preserves Lorenz dominance. Analysis of the probability density distributions of the UGini index of the World’s counties income data indicated multimodality in two independent data sets. Applying Bayesian statistics provided a data-based classification of the World’s countries’ income distributions. The UGini index can be re-transferred into the classical index to preserve comparability with previous research.
Background: Human genetic research has implicated functional variants of more than one hundred genes in the modulation of persisting pain. Artificial intelligence and machine‐learning techniques may combine this knowledge with results of genetic research gathered in any context, which permits the identification of the key biological processes involved in chronic sensitization to pain.
Methods: Based on published evidence, a set of 110 genes carrying variants reported to be associated with modulation of the clinical phenotype of persisting pain in eight different clinical settings was submitted to unsupervised machine‐learning aimed at functional clustering. Subsequently, a mathematically supported subset of genes, comprising those most consistently involved in persisting pain, was analysed by means of computational functional genomics in the Gene Ontology knowledgebase.
Results: Clustering of genes with evidence for a modulation of persisting pain elucidated a functionally heterogeneous set. The situation cleared when the focus was narrowed to a genetic modulation consistently observed throughout several clinical settings. On this basis, two groups of biological processes, the immune system and nitric oxide signalling, emerged as major players in sensitization to persisting pain, which is biologically highly plausible and in agreement with other lines of pain research.
Conclusions: The present computational functional genomics‐based approach provided a computational systems‐biology perspective on chronic sensitization to pain. Human genetic control of persisting pain points to the immune system as a source of potential future targets for drugs directed against persisting pain. Contemporary machine‐learned methods provide innovative approaches to knowledge discovery from previous evidence.
Significance: We show that knowledge discovery in genetic databases and contemporary machine‐learned techniques can identify relevant biological processes involved in Persitent pain.
Motivation: Calculating the magnitude of treatment effects or of differences between two groups is a common task in quantitative science. Standard effect size measures based on differences, such as the commonly used Cohen's, fail to capture the treatment-related effects on the data if the effects were not reflected by the central tendency. The present work aims at (i) developing a non-parametric alternative to Cohen’s d, which (ii) circumvents some of its numerical limitations and (iii) involves obvious changes in the data that do not affect the group means and are therefore not captured by Cohen’s d.
Results: We propose "Impact” as a novel non-parametric measure of effect size obtained as the sum of two separate components and includes (i) a difference-based effect size measure implemented as the change in the central tendency of the group-specific data normalized to pooled variability and (ii) a data distribution shape-based effect size measure implemented as the difference in probability density of the group-specific data. Results obtained on artificial and empirical data showed that “Impact”is superior to Cohen's d by its additional second component in detecting clearly visible effects not reflected in central tendencies. The proposed effect size measure is invariant to the scaling of the data, reflects changes in the central tendency in cases where differences in the shape of probability distributions between subgroups are negligible, but captures changes in probability distributions as effects and is numerically stable even if the variances of the data set or its subgroups disappear.
Conclusions: The proposed effect size measure shares the ability to observe such an effect with machine learning algorithms. Therefore, the proposed effect size measure is particularly well suited for data science and artificial intelligence-based knowledge discovery from big and heterogeneous data.
The presence of cerebral lesions in patients with neurosensory alterations provides a unique window into brain function. Using a fuzzy logic based combination of morphological information about 27 olfactory-eloquent brain regions acquired with four different brain imaging techniques, patterns of brain damage were analyzed in 127 patients who displayed anosmia, i.e., complete loss of the sense of smell (n = 81), or other and mechanistically still incompletely understood olfactory dysfunctions including parosmia, i.e., distorted perceptions of olfactory stimuli (n = 50), or phantosmia, i.e., olfactory hallucinations (n = 22). A higher prevalence of parosmia, and as a tendency also phantosmia, was observed in subjects with medium overall brain damage. Further analysis showed a lower frequency of lesions in the right temporal lobe in patients with parosmia than in patients without parosmia. This negative direction of the differences was unique for parosmia. In anosmia, and also in phantosmia, lesions were more frequent in patients displaying the respective symptoms than in those without these dysfunctions. In anosmic patients, lesions in the right olfactory bulb region were much more frequent than in patients with preserved sense of smell, whereas a higher frequency of carriers of lesions in the left frontal lobe was observed for phantosmia. We conclude that anosmia, and phantosmia, are the result of lost function in relevant brain areas whereas parosmia is more complex, requiring damaged and intact brain regions at the same time.
In a recent discussion on how to deal with data analysis issues initiated by reviewers of pain-related scientific manuscripts in the European Journal of Pain, a seemingly simple statistical issue was raised: two subsets of data in a paper had the same mean and standard deviation. A reviewer asked for a statistical test for or against the identity of the subset distributions. The authors insisted that if the mean and standard deviation were the same, this was sufficient evidence that the subsets of data were not significantly different.
This prompted a discussion among pain researchers, who are not necessarily primarily from the field of data science, a discussion of the importance of carefully examining the distribution of pain-related data in a journal whose primary audience is pain researchers seems warranted...
Motivation: Gaussian mixture models (GMMs) are probabilistic models commonly used in biomedical research to detect subgroup structures in data sets with one-dimensional information. Reliable model parameterization requires that the number of modes, i.e., states of the generating process, is known. However, this is rarely the case for empirically measured biomedical data. Several implementations are available that estimate GMM parameters differently. This work aims to provide a comparative evaluation of automated GMM fitting methods.
Results and conclusions: The performance of commonly used algorithms for automatic parameterization and mode number determination was compared with respect to reproducing the ground truth of generated data derived from multiple normal distributions. Four main variants of Gaussian mode number detection algorithms and five variants of GMM parameter estimation methods were tested in a combinatory scenario. The combination of best performing mode number determination algorithms and GMM parameter estimation methods was then tested on artificial and real-live data sets known to display a GMM structure. None of the tested methods correctly determined the underlying data structure consistently. The likelihood ratio test had the best performance in identifying the mode number associated with the best GMM fit of the data distribution while the Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) algorithm was best for GMM parameter estimation while. The combination of the two methods of number determination algorithms and GMM parameter estimation was consistently among the best and overall outperformed the available implementations.
Implementation: An automated tool for the detection of GMM based structures in (biomedical) datasets was created based on the present results and made freely available in the R library “opGMMassessment” at https://cran.r-project.org/package=opGMMassessment.
Computed ABC analysis for rational selection of most informative variables in multivariate data
(2015)
Objective: Multivariate data sets often differ in several factors or derived statistical parameters, which have to be selected for a valid interpretation. Basing this selection on traditional statistical limits leads occasionally to the perception of losing information from a data set. This paper proposes a novel method for calculating precise limits for the selection of parameter sets.
Methods: The algorithm is based on an ABC analysis and calculates these limits on the basis of the mathematical properties of the distribution of the analyzed items. The limits implement the aim of any ABC analysis, i.e., comparing the increase in yield to the required additional effort. In particular, the limit for set A, the "important few", is optimized in a way that both, the effort and the yield for the other sets (B and C), are minimized and the additional gain is optimized.
Results: As a typical example from biomedical research, the feasibility of the ABC analysis as an objective replacement for classical subjective limits to select highly relevant variance components of pain thresholds is presented. The proposed method improved the biological interpretation of the results and increased the fraction of valid information that was obtained from the experimental data.
Conclusions: The method is applicable to many further biomedical problems including the creation of diagnostic complex biomarkers or short screening tests from comprehensive test batteries. Thus, the ABC analysis can be proposed as a mathematically valid replacement for traditional limits to maximize the information obtained from multivariate research data.
Advances in flow cytometry enable the acquisition of large and high-dimensional data sets per patient. Novel computational techniques allow the visualization of structures in these data and, finally, the identification of relevant subgroups. Correct data visualizations and projections from the high-dimensional space to the visualization plane require the correct representation of the structures in the data. This work shows that frequently used techniques are unreliable in this respect. One of the most important methods for data projection in this area is the t-distributed stochastic neighbor embedding (t-SNE). We analyzed its performance on artificial and real biomedical data sets. t-SNE introduced a cluster structure for homogeneously distributed data that did not contain any subgroupstructure. Inotherdatasets,t-SNEoccasionallysuggestedthewrongnumberofsubgroups or projected data points belonging to different subgroups, as if belonging to the same subgroup. As an alternative approach, emergent self-organizing maps (ESOM) were used in combination with U-matrix methods. This approach allowed the correct identification of homogeneous data while in sets containing distance or density-based subgroups structures; the number of subgroups and data point assignments were correctly displayed. The results highlight possible pitfalls in the use of a currently widely applied algorithmic technique for the detection of subgroups in high dimensional cytometric data and suggest a robust alternative.
Diminished sense of smell impairs the quality of life but olfactorily disabled people are hardly considered in measures of disability inclusion. We aimed to stratify perceptual characteristics and odors according to the extent to which they are perceived differently with reduced sense of smell, as a possible basis for creating olfactory experiences that are enjoyed in a similar way by subjects with normal or impaired olfactory function. In 146 subjects with normal or reduced olfactory function, perceptual characteristics (edibility, intensity, irritation, temperature, familiarity, hedonics, painfulness) were tested for four sets of 10 different odors each. Data were analyzed with (i) a projection based on principal component analysis and (ii) the training of a machine-learning algorithm in a 1000-fold cross-validated setting to distinguish between olfactory diagnosis based on odor property ratings. Both analytical approaches identified perceived intensity and familiarity with the odor as discriminating characteristics between olfactory diagnoses, while evoked pain sensation and perceived temperature were not discriminating, followed by edibility. Two disjoint sets of odors were identified, i.e., d = 4 “discriminating odors” with respect to olfactory diagnosis, including cis-3-hexenol, methyl salicylate, 1-butanol and cineole, and d = 7 “non-discriminating odors”, including benzyl acetate, heptanal, 4-ethyl-octanoic acid, methional, isobutyric acid, 4-decanolide and p-cresol. Different weightings of the perceptual properties of odors with normal or reduced sense of smell indicate possibilities to create sensory experiences such as food, meals or scents that by emphasizing trigeminal perceptions can be enjoyed by both normosmic and hyposmic individuals.
Background: The quantification of global DNA methylation has been established in epigenetic screening. As more practicable alternatives to the HPLC-based gold standard, the methylation analysis of CpG islands in repeatable elements (LINE-1) and the luminometric methylation assay (LUMA) of overall 5-methylcytosine content in “CCGG” recognition sites are most widely used. Both methods are applied as virtually equivalent, despite the hints that their results only partly agree. This triggered the present agreement assessments.
Results: Three different human cell types (cultured MCF7 and SHSY5Y cell lines treated with different chemical modulators of DNA methylation and whole blood drawn from pain patients and healthy volunteers) were submitted to the global DNA methylation assays employing LINE-1 or LUMA-based pyrosequencing measurements. The agreement between the two bioassays was assessed using generally accepted approaches to the statistics for laboratory method comparison studies. Although global DNA methylation levels measured by the two methods correlated, five different lines of statistical evidence consistently rejected the assumption of complete agreement. Specifically, a bias was observed between the two methods. In addition, both the magnitude and direction of bias were tissue-dependent. Interassay differences could be grouped based on Bayesian statistics, and these groups allowed in turn to re-identify the originating tissue.
Conclusions: Although providing partly correlated measurements of DNA methylation, interchangeability of the quantitative results obtained with LINE-1 and LUMA was jeopardized by a consistent bias between the results. Moreover, the present analyses strongly indicate a tissue specificity of the differences between the two methods.