Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24766612›Full record

ArticleJournal of proteome research2014

Normalyzer: a tool for rapid evaluation of normalization methods for omics data sets.

Aakash Chawade, Erik Alexandersson, Fredrik Levander

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of proteome research, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 146 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
146citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

146 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Brain Proteomic Responses to Glucocorticoids and Their Relationship With Transcriptome: A Systematic Meta-Analysis.FASEB journal : official publication of the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Protein Variability Patterns in Ovarian Serous Carcinoma.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Defects in anaplerotic metabolism sensitizeMicrobiology spectrum · 2025
    Article

86 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

3 authors.

Aakash ChawadeDepartment of Immunotechnology, Lund University , Medicon Village 406, SE 223 81 Lund, Sweden.
Erik Alexandersson
Fredrik Levander

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

High-throughput omics data often contain systematic biases introduced during various steps of sample processing and data generation. As the source of these biases is usually unknown, it is difficult to select an optimal normalization method for a given data set. To facilitate this process, we introduce the open-source tool "Normalyzer". It normalizes the data with 12 different normalization methods and generates a report with several quantitative and qualitative plots for comparative evaluation of different methods. The usefulness of Normalyzer is demonstrated with three different case studies from quantitative proteomics and transcriptomics. The results from these case studies show that the choice of normalization method strongly influences the outcome of downstream quantitative comparisons. Normalyzer is an R package and can be used locally or through the online implementation at http://quantitativeproteomics.org/normalyzer .

Indexed as

SoftwareData Interpretation, StatisticalGene Expression ProfilingHumansOligonucleotide Array Sequence AnalysisProteomeProteomicsTandem Mass SpectrometryProteome

Identifiers

PMID24766612
PMCPMC4053077

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.