ArticleAnalytical and bioanalytical chemistry2016
PEPR: pipelines for evaluating prokaryotic references.
Article in Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advantages of genome sequencing by long-read sequencer using SMRT technology in medical area.Human cell · 2017Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The rapid adoption of microbial whole genome sequencing in public health, clinical testing, and forensic laboratories requires the use of validated measurement processes. Well-characterized, homogeneous, and stable microbial genomic reference materials can be used to evaluate measurement processes, improving confidence in microbial whole genome sequencing results. We have developed a reproducible and transparent bioinformatics tool, PEPR, Pipelines for Evaluating Prokaryotic References, for characterizing the reference genome of prokaryotic genomic materials. PEPR evaluates the quality, purity, and homogeneity of the reference material genome, and purity of the genomic material. The quality of the genome is evaluated using high coverage paired-end sequence data; coverage, paired-end read size and direction, as well as soft-clipping rates, are used to identify mis-assemblies. The homogeneity and purity of the material relative to the reference genome are characterized by comparing base calls from replicate datasets generated using multiple sequencing technologies. Genomic purity of the material is assessed by checking for DNA contaminants. We demonstrate the tool and its output using sequencing data while developing a Staphylococcus aureus candidate genomic reference material. PEPR is open source and available at https://github.com/usnistgov/pepr .
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.