ArticleScientific reports2019
A novel data fusion method for the effective analysis of multiple panels of flow cytometry data.
Article in Scientific reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Natural killer cell profiles in recurrent pregnancy loss: Increased expression and positive associations with TACTILE and LILRB1.American journal of reproductive immunology (New York, N.Y. : 1989) · 2022Article
- Impacts of microplastics on immunity.Frontiers in toxicology · 2022Review
- High-throughput single-cell quantification of hundreds of proteins using conventional flow cytometry and machine learning.Science advances · 2021Article
- Flow cytometric evaluation of the neutrophil compartment in COVID-19 at hospital presentation: A normal response to an abnormal situation.Journal of leukocyte biology · 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
9 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Multicolour flow cytometry (MFC) is used to measure multiple cellular markers at the single-cell level. Cellular markers may be coloured with different panels of fluorescently-labelled antibodies to enable cell identification or the detection of activated cells in pre-defined, 'gated' specific cell subsets. The number of markers that can be used per measurement is technologically limited however, requiring every panel to be analysed in a separate aliquot measurement. The combined analyses of these dedicated panels may enhance the predictive ability of these measurements and could enrich the interpretation of the immunological information. Here we introduce a fusion method for MFC data, based on DAMACY (Discriminant Analysis of Multi-Aspect Cytometry data), which can combine information from complementary panels. This approach leads to both enhanced predictions and clearer interpretations in comparison with the analysis of separate measurements. We illustrate this method using two datasets: the response of neutrophils evoked by a systemic endotoxin challenge and the activated immune status of the innate cells, T cells and B cells in obese versus lean individuals. The data fusion approach was able to detect cells that do not individually show a difference between clinical phenotypes but do play a role in combination with other cells.
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.