Skip Navigation

Bioinformatics 2008 24(16):i119-i125; doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btn291
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (Print PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Supplementary Data
Right arrow Comments: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when Comments are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Yu, S.
Right arrow Articles by Moreau, Y.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Yu, S.
Right arrow Articles by Moreau, Y.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2008. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Comparison of vocabularies, representations and ranking algorithms for gene prioritization by text mining

Shi Yu *, Steven Van Vooren , Leon-Charles Tranchevent , Bart De Moor and Yves Moreau

Bioinformatics group, SCD, Department of Electrical Engineering, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Kasteelpark Arenberg 10, B-3001 Heverlee, Belgium

*To whom correspondence should be addressed.


   Abstract

Motivation: Computational gene prioritization methods are useful to help identify susceptibility genes potentially being involved in genetic disease. Recently, text mining techniques have been applied to extract prior knowledge from text-based genomic information sources and this knowledge can be used to improve the prioritization process. However, the effect of various vocabularies, representations and ranking algorithms on text mining for gene prioritization is still an issue that requires systematic and comparative studies. Therefore, a benchmark study about the vocabularies, representations and ranking algorithms in gene prioritization by text mining is discussed in this article.

Results: We investigated 5 different domain vocabularies, 2 text representation schemes and 27 linear ranking algorithms for disease gene prioritization by text mining. We indexed 288 177 MEDLINE titles and abstracts with the TXTGate text profiling system and adapted the benchmark dataset of the Endeavour gene prioritization system that consists of 618 disease-causing genes. Textual gene profiles were created and their performance for prioritization were evaluated and discussed in a comparative manner. The results show that inverse document frequency-basedrepresentation of gene term vectors performs better than the term-frequency inverse document-frequency representation. The eVOC and MESH domain vocabularies perform better than Gene Ontology, Online Mendelian Inheritance in Man's and London Dysmorphology Database. The ranking algorithms based on 1-SVM, Standard Correlation and Ward linkage method provide the best performance.

Availability: The MATLAB code of the algorithm and benchmark datasets are available by request.

Contact: shi.yu{at}esat.kuleuven.be

Supplementary information: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
BioinformaticsHome page
J. Sun, P. Jia, A. H. Fanous, B. T. Webb, E. J.C.G. van den Oord, X. Chen, J. Bukszar, K. S. Kendler, and Z. Zhao
A multi-dimensional evidence-based candidate gene prioritization approach for complex diseases-schizophrenia as a case
Bioinformatics, October 1, 2009; 25(19): 2595 - 6602.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
BioinformaticsHome page
D. Trieschnigg, P. Pezik, V. Lee, F. de Jong, W. Kraaij, and D. Rebholz-Schuhmann
MeSH Up: effective MeSH text classification for improved document retrieval
Bioinformatics, June 1, 2009; 25(11): 1412 - 1418.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.