Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20846932›Full record

ReviewHuman genomics2010

A survey of analysis software for array-comparative genomic hybridisation studies to detect copy number variation.

Anis Karimpour-Fard, Laura Dumas, Tzulip Phang, James M Sikela, Lawrence E Hunter

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Human genomics, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
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

5 authors.

Anis Karimpour-FardCenter for Computational Pharmacology, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO 80045, USA. anis.karimpour-fard@ucdenver.edu
Laura Dumas
Tzulip Phang
James M Sikela
Lawrence E Hunter

Funding

University of Colorado Cancer Center Support Grant - Lung Cancer Patient-Derived Xenografts with Autologous Human Immune SystemsP30CA046934 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DENVER · PI James V Degregori · 1988 to 2026
$117.0M
Computational Bioscience Program Training GrantT15LM009451 · NLM · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DENVER · PI Katherina Kechris-Mays, Arjun Krishnan · 2007 to 2026
$11.7M
Technology Development for a MolBio Knowledge-BaseR01LM008111 · NLM · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DENVER · PI HUNTER, LAWRENCE E · 2004 to 2021
$9.7M
Bio Text NLPR01LM009254 · NLM · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DENVER · PI HUNTER, LAWRENCE E · 2006 to 2018
$5.9M
Genome Variation Underlying Alcohol ActionR01AA011853 · NIAAA · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DENVER · PI SIKELA, JAMES M · 1998 to 2013
$4.9M
Investigation of DUF1220 Domains in Human Brain Function and DiseaseR01MH081203 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DENVER · PI SIKELA, JAMES M · 2009 to 2013
$2.0M
NCI NIH HHS P30CA46934NIAAA NIH HHS 2R01AA11853-11NIMH NIH HHS 5R01MH81203-2NLM NIH HHS 5T15LM009451-03NLM NIH HHS R01 LM008111NLM NIH HHS R01LM008111NLM NIH HHS R01 LM009254NLM NIH HHS R01LM009254
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Copy number variants (CNVs) create a major source of variation among individuals and populations. Array-based comparative genomic hybridisation (aCGH) is a powerful method used to detect and compare the copy numbers of DNA sequences at high resolution along the genome. In recent years, several informatics tools for accurate and efficient CNV detection and assessment have been developed. In this paper, most of the well known algorithms, analysis software and the limitations of that software will be briefly reviewed.

Indexed as

Data CollectionComparative Genomic HybridizationComputational BiologyDNA Copy Number VariationsHumansMarkov ChainsSoftware

Identifiers

PMID20846932
PMCPMC3525224

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.