Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17288599›Full record

ArticleBMC bioinformatics2007

Improved precision and accuracy for microarrays using updated probe set definitions.

Rickard Sandberg, Ola Larsson

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 94 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
94citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.6field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

94 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 159 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. The history and conceptual framework of assays and screens.BioEssays : news and reviews in molecular, cellular and developmental biology · 2023
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Transcriptomic Profiling for the Autophagy Pathway in Colorectal Cancer.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

34 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Rickard SandbergMassachusetts Institute of Technology, Department of biology, 68-211, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA. sandberg@mit.edu <sandberg@mit.edu>
Ola Larsson
Massachusetts Institute of Technology · USUniversity of Minnesota · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMicroarrays enable high throughput detection of transcript expression levels. Different investigators have recently introduced updated probe set definitions to more accurately map probes to our current knowledge of genes and transcripts.

resultsWe demonstrate that updated probe set definitions provide both better precision and accuracy in probe set estimates compared to the original Affymetrix definitions. We show that the improved precision mainly depends on the increased number of probes that are integrated into each probe set, but we also demonstrate an improvement when the same number of probes is used.

conclusionUpdated probe set definitions does not only offer expression levels that are more accurately associated to genes and transcripts but also improvements in the estimated transcript expression levels. These results give support for the use of updated probe set definitions for analysis and meta-analysis of microarray data.

Indexed as

Oligonucleotide Array Sequence AnalysisReverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction

Identifiers

PMID17288599
PMCPMC1805763
OpenAlexW1609815973

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.