ReviewJournal of biomolecular techniques : JBT2017
International Standards for Genomes, Transcriptomes, and Metagenomes.
Review in Journal of biomolecular techniques : JBT, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 24 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
24 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Vacc-SeqQC project: Benchmarking RNA-Seq for clinical vaccine studies.Frontiers in immunology · 2022Trial
- Role of Esterase BmeFE4 in Mediating the Alleviating Effects of Resveratrol on NaF-Induced Fluorosis inToxics · 2026Article
- Benchmarking DNA extraction protocols across use cases for culture-independent Nanopore metagenomics.Microbial genomics · 2026Article
- Article
- Impact of microbiological molecular methodologies on adaptive sampling using nanopore sequencing in metagenomic studies.Environmental microbiome · 2025Article
- Non-Targeted RNA Sequencing: Towards the Development of Universal Clinical Diagnosis Methods for Human and Veterinary Infectious Diseases.Veterinary sciences · 2024Review
- A novel synthetic nucleic acid mixture for quantification of microbes by mNGS.Microbial genomics · 2024Article
- Challenges and opportunities in sharing microbiome data and analyses.Nature microbiology · 2023Review
- Network analysis for estimating standardization trends in genomics using MEDLINE.BMC medical research methodology · 2022Article
- Epigenetic tumor heterogeneity in the era of single-cell profiling with nanopore sequencing.Clinical epigenetics · 2022Review
- Loop-Mediated Isothermal Amplification Detection of SARS-CoV-2 and Myriad Other Applications.Journal of biomolecular techniques : JBT · 2021Review
- Single-cell transcriptome conservation in a comparative analysis of fresh and cryopreserved human skin tissue: pilot in localized scleroderma.Arthritis research & therapy · 2020Article
- Implications of Error-Prone Long-Read Whole-Genome Shotgun Sequencing on Characterizing Reference Microbiomes.iScience · 2020Article
- A Review of the Scientific Rigor, Reproducibility, and Transparency Studies Conducted by the ABRF Research Groups.Journal of biomolecular techniques : JBT · 2020Review
- A Literature Review of Metagenomics and Culturomics of the Peri-implant Microbiome: Current Evidence and Future Perspectives.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Review
- Article
- Minerva: an alignment- and reference-free approach to deconvolve Linked-Reads for metagenomics.Genome research · 2019Article
- The Impact of Heterogeneity on Single-Cell Sequencing.Frontiers in genetics · 2019Article
- Synthetic microbe communities provide internal reference standards for metagenome sequencing and analysis.Nature communications · 2018Article
- The High-Throughput Analyses Era: Are We Ready for the Data Struggle?High-throughput · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Challenges and biases in preparing, characterizing, and sequencing DNA and RNA can have significant impacts on research in genomics across all kingdoms of life, including experiments in single-cells, RNA profiling, and metagenomics (across multiple genomes). Technical artifacts and contamination can arise at each point of sample manipulation, extraction, sequencing, and analysis. Thus, the measurement and benchmarking of these potential sources of error are of paramount importance as next-generation sequencing (NGS) projects become more global and ubiquitous. Fortunately, a variety of methods, standards, and technologies have recently emerged that improve measurements in genomics and sequencing, from the initial input material to the computational pipelines that process and annotate the data. Here we review current standards and their applications in genomics, including whole genomes, transcriptomes, mixed genomic samples (metagenomes), and the modified bases within each (epigenomes and epitranscriptomes). These standards, tools, and metrics are critical for quantifying the accuracy of NGS methods, which will be essential for robust approaches in clinical genomics and precision medicine.
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.