Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27796336›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2016

Rawcopy: Improved copy number analysis with Affymetrix arrays.

Markus Mayrhofer, Björn Viklund, Anders Isaksson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing 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

40 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. The diagnostic utility of DNA copy number analysis of core needle biopsies from soft tissue and bone tumors.Laboratory investigation; a journal of technical methods and pathology · 2022
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2022
    Article
  16. Enhancer Hijacking Drives OncogenicCancer discovery · 2021
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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.

Markus MayrhoferScience for Life Laboratory, Department of Medical Sciences, Uppsala University, SE-751 85 Uppsala, Sweden.
Björn ViklundScience for Life Laboratory, Department of Medical Sciences, Uppsala University, SE-751 85 Uppsala, Sweden.
Anders IsakssonScience for Life Laboratory, Department of Medical Sciences, Uppsala University, SE-751 85 Uppsala, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Microarray data is subject to noise and systematic variation that negatively affects the resolution of copy number analysis. We describe Rawcopy, an R package for processing of Affymetrix CytoScan HD, CytoScan 750k and SNP 6.0 microarray raw intensities (CEL files). Noise characteristics of a large number of reference samples are used to estimate log ratio and B-allele frequency for total and allele-specific copy number analysis. Rawcopy achieves better signal-to-noise ratio and higher proportion of validated alterations than commonly used free and proprietary alternatives. In addition, Rawcopy visualizes each microarray sample for assessment of technical quality, patient identity and genome-wide absolute copy number states. Software and instructions are available at http://rawcopy.org.

Identifiers

PMID27796336
PMCPMC5086940

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.