ArticleEvolutionary bioinformatics online2019
A Commentary on Diversity Measures UniFrac in Very Small Sample Size.
Article in Evolutionary bioinformatics online, 2019. 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.
- Abdominal Symptoms During the Febrile Phase Indicate Profound Innate Immune Responses in Dengue.Biology · 2026Article
- Prokaryotic Communities in the Thalassohaline Tuz Lake, Deep Zone, and Kayacik, Kaldirim and Yavsan Salterns (Turkey) Assessed by 16S rRNA Amplicon Sequencing.Microorganisms · 2021Article
- Analysing microbiome intervention design studies: Comparison of alternative multivariate statistical methods.PloS one · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In phylogenetic, the diversity measures as UniFrac, weighted UniFrac, and normalized weighted UniFrac are used to estimate the closeness between two samples of genetic material sequences. These measures are widely used in microbiology to compare microbial communities. Furthermore, when the sample size is large enough, very good results have been obtained experimentally. However, some authors do not suggest using them when the sample size is very small. Recently, it has been mentioned that the weighted UniFrac measure can be seen as the Kantorovich-Rubinstein metric between the corresponding empirical distributions of samples of genetic material. Also, it is well known that the Kantorovich-Rubinstein metric complies the metric definition. However, one of the main reasons to establish it is that the sample size is large enough. The goal of this article is to prove that the diversity measures UniFrac are not metrics when the sample size is very small, which justifies why it must not be used in that case, but yes the Kantorovich-Rubinstein metric.
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.