ArticleNAR cancer2020
Unique
Article in NAR cancer, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- An alignment-free strategy for circulating tumor DNA detection and tumor fraction estimation from whole-genome sequencing data.PLoS computational biology · 2026Article
- An alignment- and reference-free strategy usingMycology · 2025Article
- A survey of k-mer methods and applications in bioinformatics.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2024Review
- Distribution rules of 8-mer spectra and characterization of evolution state in animal genome sequences.BMC genomics · 2024Article
- Pan-conserved segment tags identify ultra-conserved sequences across assemblies in the human pangenome.Cell reports methods · 2023Article
- Portable nanopore-sequencing technology: Trends in development and applications.Frontiers in microbiology · 2023Review
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Cancer genome sequencing has led to important discoveries such as the identification of cancer genes. However, challenges remain in the analysis of cancer genome sequencing. One significant issue is that mutations identified by multiple variant callers are frequently discordant even when using the same genome sequencing data. For insertion and deletion mutations, oftentimes there is no agreement among different callers. Identifying somatic mutations involves read mapping and variant calling, a complicated process that uses many parameters and model tuning. To validate the identification of true mutations, we developed a method using
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.