ReviewGenomics, proteomics & bioinformatics2015
Web Resources for Metagenomics Studies.
Review in Genomics, proteomics & bioinformatics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Metagenomic next-generation sequencing: new horizons in microbiology.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026Review
- Influence of Cosmetic Skincare Products with pH < 5 on the Skin Microbiome: A Randomized Clinical Evaluation.Dermatology and therapy · 2025Article
- Visualizing metagenomic and metatranscriptomic data: A comprehensive review.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2024Review
- Next-Generation Sequencing (NGS): Platforms and Applications.Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences · 2024Review
- Identification of Antibiotic Resistance Proteins via MiCId's Augmented Workflow. A Mass Spectrometry-Based Proteomics Approach.Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry · 2022Article
- Conducting metagenomic studies in microbiology and clinical research.Applied microbiology and biotechnology · 2018Review
- Marine Metagenome as A Resource for Novel Enzymes.Genomics, proteomics & bioinformatics · 2015Review
- The Value and Significance of Metagenomics of Marine Environments. Preface.Genomics, proteomics & bioinformatics · 2015Article
- The Human Microbiome and Understanding the 16S rRNA Gene in Translational Nursing Science.Nursing researchReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The development of next-generation sequencing (NGS) platforms spawned an enormous volume of data. This explosion in data has unearthed new scalability challenges for existing bioinformatics tools. The analysis of metagenomic sequences using bioinformatics pipelines is complicated by the substantial complexity of these data. In this article, we review several commonly-used online tools for metagenomics data analysis with respect to their quality and detail of analysis using simulated metagenomics data. There are at least a dozen such software tools presently available in the public domain. Among them, MGRAST, IMG/M, and METAVIR are the most well-known tools according to the number of citations by peer-reviewed scientific media up to mid-2015. Here, we describe 12 online tools with respect to their web link, annotation pipelines, clustering methods, online user support, and availability of data storage. We have also done the rating for each tool to screen more potential and preferential tools and evaluated five best tools using synthetic metagenome. The article comprehensively deals with the contemporary problems and the prospects of metagenomics from a bioinformatics viewpoint.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.