ReviewBriefings in functional genomics2018
Clustering single cells: a review of approaches on high-and low-depth single-cell RNA-seq data.
Review in Briefings in functional genomics, 2018. 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 37 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
37 citing papers in PubMed.
- Safe focused ultrasound-mediated blood-brain barrier opening is driven primarily by transient reorganization of tight junctions.Communications engineering · 2026Article
- Enabling scalable single-cell transcriptomic analysis through distributed computing with Apache spark.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- A survey of biclustering and clustering methods in clustering different types of single-cell RNA sequencing data.Briefings in functional genomics · 2025Article
- Implementation and validation of single-cell genomics experiments in neuroscience.Nature neuroscience · 2024Review
- Identifying cell states in single-cell RNA-seq data at statistically maximal resolution.PLoS computational biology · 2024Article
- Article
- GammaGateR: semi-automated marker gating for single-cell multiplexed imaging.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2024Article
- Characterization of the responses of brain macrophages to focused ultrasound-mediated blood-brain barrier opening.Nature biomedical engineering · 2024Article
- CAKE: a flexible self-supervised framework for enhancing cell visualization, clustering and rare cell identification.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2023Article
- GammaGateR: semi-automated marker gating for single-cell multiplexed imaging.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2023Article
- Article
- ClonoCluster: A method for using clonal origin to inform transcriptome clustering.Cell genomics · 2023Article
- Transcriptome analysis of the binucleate ciliateMolecular biology of the cell · 2023Article
- Statistical Analysis of Multiplex Immunofluorescence and Immunohistochemistry Imaging Data.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2023Review
- Article
- Mouse genomic and cellular annotations.Mammalian genome : official journal of the International Mammalian Genome Society · 2022Review
- Identification of adult spinal Shox2 neuronal subpopulations based on unbiased computational clustering of electrophysiological properties.Frontiers in neural circuits · 2022Article
- Gene Co-expression Network Analysis of the Comparative Transcriptome Identifies Hub Genes Associated With Resistance toFrontiers in plant science · 2022Article
- Development of allogeneic HSC-engineered iNKT cells for off-the-shelf cancer immunotherapy.Cell reports. Medicine · 2021Article
- Tutorial: guidelines for annotating single-cell transcriptomic maps using automated and manual methods.Nature protocols · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
Advances in single-cell RNA-sequencing technology have resulted in a wealth of studies aiming to identify transcriptomic cell types in various biological systems. There are multiple experimental approaches to isolate and profile single cells, which provide different levels of cellular and tissue coverage. In addition, multiple computational strategies have been proposed to identify putative cell types from single-cell data. From a data generation perspective, recent single-cell studies can be classified into two groups: those that distribute reads shallowly over large numbers of cells and those that distribute reads more deeply over a smaller cell population. Although there are advantages to both approaches in terms of cellular and tissue coverage, it is unclear whether different computational cell type identification methods are better suited to one or the other experimental paradigm. This study reviews three cell type clustering algorithms, each representing one of three broad approaches, and finds that PCA-based algorithms appear most suited to low read depth data sets, whereas gene clustering-based and biclustering algorithms perform better on high read depth data sets. In addition, highly related cell classes are better distinguished by higher-depth data, given the same total number of reads; however, simultaneous discovery of distinct and similar types is better served by lower-depth, higher cell number data. Overall, this study suggests that the depth of profiling should be determined by initial assumptions about the diversity of cells in the population, and that the selection of clustering algorithm(s) subsequently based on the depth of profiling will allow for better identification of putative transcriptomic cell types.
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.