Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32665548›Full record

ArticleNature communications2020

Analysis of compositions of microbiomes with bias correction.

Huang Lin, Shyamal Das Peddada

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nature communications, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06869941 (Adipose Tissue Gene Expression and Metabolomics Links to the Gut Microbiome-brain Axis), which is not on this map. Cited by 1,295 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1,295citing 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.

NCT06869941 recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Adipose Tissue Gene Expression and Metabolomics Links to the Gut Microbiome-brain Axis (POINSETTIA Study)

Typeobservational_patient_registrySponsorInstitut d'Investigació Biomèdica de Girona Dr. Josep TruetaRan2025 to 2027Enrolled100ConditionsObesity
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1,295 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Antibiotic-associatedGut microbes · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Observational
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

1,235 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

2 authors.

Huang LinDepartment of Biostatistics, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, 15261, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4892-7871
Shyamal Das PeddadaDepartment of Biostatistics, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, 15261, USA. shyamal.peddada@nih.gov.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Differential abundance (DA) analysis of microbiome data continues to be a challenging problem due to the complexity of the data. In this article we define the notion of "sampling fraction" and demonstrate a major hurdle in performing DA analysis of microbiome data is the bias introduced by differences in the sampling fractions across samples. We introduce a methodology called Analysis of Compositions of Microbiomes with Bias Correction (ANCOM-BC), which estimates the unknown sampling fractions and corrects the bias induced by their differences among samples. The absolute abundance data are modeled using a linear regression framework. This formulation makes a fundamental advancement in the field because, unlike the existing methods, it (a) provides statistically valid test with appropriate p-values, (b) provides confidence intervals for differential abundance of each taxon, (c) controls the False Discovery Rate (FDR), (d) maintains adequate power, and (e) is computationally simple to implement.

Indexed as

Computational BiologyEcologyHumansMicrobiologyMicrobiota

Identifiers

PMID32665548
PMCPMC7360769

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.