ArticleNature genetics2009
Repeatability of published microarray gene expression analyses.
Article in Nature genetics, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 231 papers, 12 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
231 citing papers in PubMed, 12 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Methods for Heart Rate Variability Biofeedback (HRVB): A Systematic Review and Guidelines.Applied psychophysiology and biofeedback · 2023Pooled it
- Prevalence and predictors of data and code sharing in the medical and health sciences: systematic review with meta-analysis of individual participant data.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2023Pooled it
- Independent validation of induced overexpression efficiency across 242 experiments shows a success rate of 39.Scientific reports · 2019Pooled it
- Identification of gene expression profiles in myocardial infarction: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC medical genomics · 2018Pooled it
- Gene expression profiles in neurological tissues during West Nile virus infection: a critical meta-analysis.BMC genomics · 2018Pooled it
- DNA aneuploidy and breast cancer: a meta-analysis of 141,163 cases.Oncotarget · 2016Pooled it
- Evaluation of public cancer datasets and signatures identifies TP53 mutant signatures with robust prognostic and predictive value.BMC cancer · 2015Pooled it
- Comparative meta-analysis of prognostic gene signatures for late-stage ovarian cancer.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2014Pooled it
- Evaluation of gene expression classification studies: factors associated with classification performance.PloS one · 2014Pooled it
- Meta-analysis of gene expression signatures reveals hidden links among diverse biological processes in Arabidopsis.PloS one · 2014Pooled it
- A data similarity-based strategy for meta-analysis of transcriptional profiles in cancer.PloS one · 2013Pooled it
- Clinical value of prognosis gene expression signatures in colorectal cancer: a systematic review.PloS one · 2012Pooled it
- International multisite implementation of distributed cell-free protein biomanufacturing to advance health and research equity.Science advances · 2026Article
- Differential Expression of microRNAs in Obese Mexican Children: Links to Insulin Resistance and Dyslipidemia.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Observational
- Integrating -Omic Technologies across Modality, Space, and Time to Decipher Remodeling in Cardiac Disease.Current cardiology reports · 2025Review
- DExplore: An Online Tool for Detecting Differentially Expressed Genes from mRNA Microarray Experiments.Biology · 2024Article
- REFORMS: Consensus-based Recommendations for Machine-learning-based Science.Science advances · 2024Review
- Guidelines for reproducible analysis of adaptive immune receptor repertoire sequencing data.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2024Article
- DNMT3L inhibits hepatocellular carcinoma progression through DNA methylation of CDO1: insights from big data to basic research.Journal of translational medicine · 2024Article
- Article
171 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Given the complexity of microarray-based gene expression studies, guidelines encourage transparent design and public data availability. Several journals require public data deposition and several public databases exist. However, not all data are publicly available, and even when available, it is unknown whether the published results are reproducible by independent scientists. Here we evaluated the replication of data analyses in 18 articles on microarray-based gene expression profiling published in Nature Genetics in 2005-2006. One table or figure from each article was independently evaluated by two teams of analysts. We reproduced two analyses in principle and six partially or with some discrepancies; ten could not be reproduced. The main reason for failure to reproduce was data unavailability, and discrepancies were mostly due to incomplete data annotation or specification of data processing and analysis. Repeatability of published microarray studies is apparently limited. More strict publication rules enforcing public data availability and explicit description of data processing and analysis should be considered.
Indexed as
Identifiers
19174838What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.