ArticleGenome biology and evolution2018
Turning Vice into Virtue: Using Batch-Effects to Detect Errors in Large Genomic Data Sets.
Article in Genome biology and evolution, 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
- Negative linkage disequilibrium between amino acid changing variants reveals interference among deleterious mutations in the human genome.PLoS genetics · 2021Article
- The presence and impact of reference bias on population genomic studies of prehistoric human populations.PLoS genetics · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
It is often unavoidable to combine data from different sequencing centers or sequencing platforms when compiling data sets with a large number of individuals. However, the different data are likely to contain specific systematic errors that will appear as SNPs. Here, we devise a method to detect systematic errors in combined data sets. To measure quality differences between individual genomes, we study pairs of variants that reside on different chromosomes and co-occur in individuals. The abundance of these pairs of variants in different genomes is then used to detect systematic errors due to batch effects. Applying our method to the 1000 Genomes data set, we find that coding regions are enriched for errors, where ∼1% of the higher frequency variants are predicted to be erroneous, whereas errors outside of coding regions are much rarer (<0.001%). As expected, predicted errors are found less often than other variants in a data set that was generated with a different sequencing technology, indicating that many of the candidates are indeed errors. However, predicted 1000 Genomes errors are also found in other large data sets; our observation is thus not specific to the 1000 Genomes data set. Our results show that batch effects can be turned into a virtue by using the resulting variation in large scale data sets to detect systematic errors.
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.