Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23020243›Full record

ArticleBMC bioinformatics2012

QUAliFiER: an automated pipeline for quality assessment of gated flow cytometry data.

Greg Finak, Wenxin Jiang, Jorge Pardo, Adam Asare, Raphael Gottardo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing 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

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Refining Viral Production Estimation.Environmental microbiology reports · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. TGF-β-p-STAT1-LAIR2 axis has a "self-rescue" role for exhausted CD8Cellular oncology (Dordrecht, Netherlands) · 2023
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Improving the Rigor and Reproducibility of Flow Cytometry-Based Clinical Research and Trials Through Automated Data Analysis.Cytometry. Part A : the journal of the International Society for Analytical Cytology · 2020
    Article
  12. Data-Driven Flow Cytometry Analysis.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2019
    Review
  13. CymeR: cytometry analysis using KNIME, docker and R.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2017
    Article
  14. Article
  15. High-throughput flow cytometry data normalization for clinical trials.Cytometry. Part A : the journal of the International Society for Analytical Cytology · 2014
    Article
  16. Review
  17. 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.

Greg FinakFred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, 1100 Fairview Avenue North, Seattle, WA 98109, USA.
Wenxin Jiang
Jorge Pardo
Adam Asare
Raphael Gottardo

Funding

Immune Tolerance Network: Type 1 diabetesN01AI15416 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF SAN FRANCISCO · PI BLUESTONE, JEFFREY · 2007 to 2013
$276.6M
The Statistical and Computational Analysis of Flow Cytometry DataR01EB008400 · NIBIB · FRED HUTCHINSON CANCER RESEARCH CENTER · PI GOTTARDO, RAPHAEL · 2008 to 2015
$2.9M
IMMUNE TOLERANCE NETWORK-266015416-266015416N01AI015416 · NIAID · REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF C · PI BLUESTONE, JEFFREY A · 2002 to 2006
–
NIAID NIH HHS N01 AI15416NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB008400
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEffective quality assessment is an important part of any high-throughput flow cytometry data analysis pipeline, especially when considering the complex designs of the typical flow experiments applied in clinical trials. Technical issues like instrument variation, problematic antibody staining, or reagent lot changes can lead to biases in the extracted cell subpopulation statistics. These biases can manifest themselves in non-obvious ways that can be difficult to detect without leveraging information about the study design or other experimental metadata. Consequently, a systematic and integrated approach to quality assessment of flow cytometry data is necessary to effectively identify technical errors that impact multiple samples over time. Gated cell populations and their statistics must be monitored within the context of the experimental run, assay, and the overall study.

resultsWe have developed two new packages, flowWorkspace and QUAliFiER to construct a pipeline for quality assessment of gated flow cytometry data. flowWorkspace makes manually gated data accessible to BioConductor's computational flow tools by importing pre-processed and gated data from the widely used manual gating tool, FlowJo (Tree Star Inc, Ashland OR). The QUAliFiER package takes advantage of the manual gates to perform an extensive series of statistical quality assessment checks on the gated cell sub-populations while taking into account the structure of the data and the study design to monitor the consistency of population statistics across staining panels, subject, aliquots, channels, or other experimental variables. QUAliFiER implements SVG-based interactive visualization methods, allowing investigators to examine quality assessment results across different views of the data, and it has a flexible interface allowing users to tailor quality checks and outlier detection routines to suit their data analysis needs.

conclusionWe present a pipeline constructed from two new R packages for importing manually gated flow cytometry data and performing flexible and robust quality assessment checks. The pipeline addresses the increasing demand for tools capable of performing quality checks on large flow data sets generated in typical clinical trials. The QUAliFiER tool objectively, efficiently, and reproducibly identifies outlier samples in an automated manner by monitoring cell population statistics from gated or ungated flow data conditioned on experiment-level metadata.

Indexed as

SoftwareData Interpretation, StatisticalFlow CytometryHumans

Identifiers

PMID23020243
PMCPMC3499158

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.