ArticleNature communications2020
Detecting sample swaps in diverse NGS data types using linkage disequilibrium.
Article in Nature communications, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- An integrated cell atlas of 2.4 million cardiac cells across 209 individuals in health and disease.Nature cardiovascular research · 2026Article
- Whole-miRNome sequencing: a panel for the targeted sequencing of all human miRNA genes.Nucleic acids research · 2025Article
- Transcriptome-wide association study of alternative polyadenylation identifies susceptibility genes in non-small cell lung cancer.Oncogene · 2025Article
- Genomic landscape of multiple myeloma and its precursor conditions.Nature genetics · 2025Article
- A multi-modal transformer for cell type-agnostic regulatory predictions.Cell genomics · 2025Article
- PISAD: reference-free intraspecies sample anomalies detection tool based on k-mer counting.GigaScience · 2025Article
- Screening a new set of microhaplotypes in exonic regions for sample identity testing and paternity testing during whole exome sequencing analysis.International journal of legal medicine · 2025Article
- Whole-genome sequencing study in Koreans identifies novel loci for Alzheimer's disease.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2024Article
- Development of a coding SNP panel for tracking the origin of whole-exome sequencing samples.BMC genomics · 2024Article
- ntsm: an alignment-free, ultra-low-coverage, sequencing technology agnostic, intraspecies sample comparison tool for sample swap detection.GigaScience · 2024Article
- Human disease-specific cell signatures in non-lesional tissue in Multiple Sclerosis detected by single-cell and spatial transcriptomics.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2023Article
- Single-cell genotypic and phenotypic analysis of measurable residual disease in acute myeloid leukemia.Science advances · 2023Article
- Molecular map of chronic lymphocytic leukemia and its impact on outcome.Nature genetics · 2022Article
- Article
- A community effort to identify and correct mislabeled samples in proteogenomic studies.Patterns (New York, N.Y.) · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
As the number of genomics datasets grows rapidly, sample mislabeling has become a high stakes issue. We present CrosscheckFingerprints (Crosscheck), a tool for quantifying sample-relatedness and detecting incorrectly paired sequencing datasets from different donors. Crosscheck outperforms similar methods and is effective even when data are sparse or from different assays. Application of Crosscheck to 8851 ENCODE ChIP-, RNA-, and DNase-seq datasets enabled us to identify and correct dozens of mislabeled samples and ambiguous metadata annotations, representing ~1% of ENCODE datasets.
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.