Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30161168›Full record

ArticlePloS one2018

Comparison of statistical methods and the use of quality control samples for batch effect correction in human transcriptome data.

Almudena Espín-Pérez, Chris Portier, Marc Chadeau-Hyam, Karin van Veldhoven, Jos C S Kleinjans, Theo M C M de Kok

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing 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

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Ovarian hormone deficiency enhances wood smoke-induced immune dysfunction via transcriptomic and metabolic alterations.Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Using genome-wide expression compendia to study microorganisms.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2022
    Review
  15. Article
  16. 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

6 authors.

Almudena Espín-PérezDepartment of Toxicogenomics, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-8329-9196
Chris PortierDepartment of Toxicogenomics, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Marc Chadeau-HyamDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Karin van VeldhovenDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Jos C S KleinjansDepartment of Toxicogenomics, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Theo M C M de KokDepartment of Toxicogenomics, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Batch effects are technical sources of variation introduced by the necessity of conducting gene expression analyses on different dates due to the large number of biological samples in population-based studies. The aim of this study is to evaluate the performances of linear mixed models (LMM) and Combat in batch effect removal. We also assessed the utility of adding quality control samples in the study design as technical replicates. In order to do so, we simulated gene expression data by adding "treatment" and batch effects to a real gene expression dataset. The performances of LMM and Combat, with and without quality control samples, are assessed in terms of sensitivity and specificity while correcting for the batch effect using a wide range of effect sizes, statistical noise, sample sizes and level of balanced/unbalanced designs. The simulations showed small differences among LMM and Combat. LMM identifies stronger relationships between big effect sizes and gene expression than Combat, while Combat identifies in general more true and false positives than LMM. However, these small differences can still be relevant depending on the research goal. When any of these methods are applied, quality control samples did not reduce the batch effect, showing no added value for including them in the study design.

Indexed as

Data Interpretation, StatisticalQuality ControlComputer SimulationFemaleGene Expression ProfilingHumansMaleMiddle AgedModels, BiologicalTranscriptome

Identifiers

PMID30161168
PMCPMC6117018

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.