ArticleGenes & genomics2018
An efficient and tunable parameter to improve variant calling for whole genome and exome sequencing data.
Article in Genes & genomics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- A study of associations between CUBN, HNF1A, and LIPC gene polymorphisms and coronary artery disease.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Association study of the three functional polymorphisms (TAS2R46G>A, OR4C16G>A, and OR4X1A>T) with recurrent pregnancy loss.Genes & genomics · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Next generation sequencing (NGS) has traditionally been performed in various fields including agricultural to clinical and there are so many sequencing platforms available in order to obtain accurate and consistent results. However, these platforms showed amplification bias when facilitating variant calls in personal genomes. Here, we sequenced whole genomes and whole exomes from ten Korean individuals using Illumina and Ion Proton, respectively to find the vulnerability and accuracy of NGS platform in the GC rich/poor area. Overall, a total of 1013 Gb reads from Illumina and ~39.1 Gb reads from Ion Proton were analyzed using BWA-GATK variant calling pipeline. Furthermore, conjunction with the VQSR tool and detailed filtering strategies, we achieved high-quality variants. Finally, each of the ten variants from Illumina only, Ion Proton only, and intersection was selected for Sanger validation. The validation results revealed that Illumina platform showed higher accuracy than Ion Proton. The described filtering methods are advantageous for large population-based whole genome studies designed to identify common and rare variations associated with complex diseases.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29892897What 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.