Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30084929›Full record

ArticleBioinformatics (Oxford, England)2019

Evaluation of cross-platform and interlaboratory concordance via consensus modelling of genomic measurements.

Timothy J Peters, Hugh J French, Stephen T Bradford, Ruth Pidsley, Clare Stirzaker, Hilal Varinli, Shalima Nair, Wenjia Qu, Jenny Song, Katherine A Giles and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bioinformatics (Oxford, England), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

14 authors.

Timothy J PetersEpigenetics Laboratory, Genomics and Epigenetics Division, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Darlinghurst, NSW, Australia.
Hugh J FrenchEpigenetics Laboratory, Genomics and Epigenetics Division, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Darlinghurst, NSW, Australia.
Stephen T BradfordEpigenetics Laboratory, Genomics and Epigenetics Division, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Darlinghurst, NSW, Australia.
Ruth PidsleyEpigenetics Laboratory, Genomics and Epigenetics Division, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Darlinghurst, NSW, Australia.
Clare StirzakerEpigenetics Laboratory, Genomics and Epigenetics Division, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Darlinghurst, NSW, Australia.
Hilal VarinliEpigenetics Laboratory, Genomics and Epigenetics Division, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Darlinghurst, NSW, Australia.
Shalima NairEpigenetics Laboratory, Genomics and Epigenetics Division, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Darlinghurst, NSW, Australia.
Wenjia QuEpigenetics Laboratory, Genomics and Epigenetics Division, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Darlinghurst, NSW, Australia.
Jenny SongEpigenetics Laboratory, Genomics and Epigenetics Division, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Darlinghurst, NSW, Australia.
Katherine A GilesEpigenetics Laboratory, Genomics and Epigenetics Division, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Darlinghurst, NSW, Australia.
Aaron L StathamEpigenetics Laboratory, Genomics and Epigenetics Division, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Darlinghurst, NSW, Australia.
Helen SpeirsRamaciotti Centre for Genomics, University of New South Wales, Randwick, NSW, Australia.
Terence P SpeedBioinformatics Division, The Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research, Parkville, VIC, Australia.
Susan J ClarkEpigenetics Laboratory, Genomics and Epigenetics Division, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Darlinghurst, NSW, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

motivationA synoptic view of the human genome benefits chiefly from the application of nucleic acid sequencing and microarray technologies. These platforms allow interrogation of patterns such as gene expression and DNA methylation at the vast majority of canonical loci, allowing granular insights and opportunities for validation of original findings. However, problems arise when validating against a "gold standard" measurement, since this immediately biases all subsequent measurements towards that particular technology or protocol. Since all genomic measurements are estimates, in the absence of a "gold standard" we instead empirically assess the measurement precision and sensitivity of a large suite of genomic technologies via a consensus modelling method called the row-linear model. This method is an application of the American Society for Testing and Materials Standard E691 for assessing interlaboratory precision and sources of variability across multiple testing sites. Both cross-platform and cross-locus comparisons can be made across all common loci, allowing identification of technology- and locus-specific tendencies.

resultsWe assess technologies including the Infinium MethylationEPIC BeadChip, whole genome bisulfite sequencing (WGBS), two different RNA-Seq protocols (PolyA+ and Ribo-Zero) and five different gene expression array platforms. Each technology thus is characterised herein, relative to the consensus. We showcase a number of applications of the row-linear model, including correlation with known interfering traits. We demonstrate a clear effect of cross-hybridisation on the sensitivity of Infinium methylation arrays. Additionally, we perform a true interlaboratory test on a set of samples interrogated on the same platform across twenty-one separate testing laboratories. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: A full implementation of the row-linear model, plus extra functions for visualisation, are found in the R package consensus at https://github.com/timpeters82/consensus. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

Indexed as

Computational BiologyDNA MethylationGenomicsGenome, HumanHumansOligonucleotide Array Sequence AnalysisSoftware

Identifiers

PMID30084929
PMCPMC6378945

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.