Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33468704›Full record

ReviewmSystems2021

Computational Analysis of Microbial Flow Cytometry Data.

Peter Rubbens, Ruben Props

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in mSystems, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Raman cell sorting for single-cell research.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Frontiers in microbiology · 2023
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
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.

Peter RubbensFlanders Marine Institute (VLIZ), Ostend, Belgium peter.rubbens@vliz.be ruben.props@ugent.be.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5595-4758
Ruben PropsCenter for Microbial Ecology & Technology (CMET), Faculty of Bioscience Engineering, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium peter.rubbens@vliz.be ruben.props@ugent.be.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Flow cytometry is an important technology for the study of microbial communities. It grants the ability to rapidly generate phenotypic single-cell data that are both quantitative, multivariate and of high temporal resolution. The complexity and amount of data necessitate an objective and streamlined data processing workflow that extends beyond commercial instrument software. No full overview of the necessary steps regarding the computational analysis of microbial flow cytometry data currently exists. In this review, we provide an overview of the full data analysis pipeline, ranging from measurement to data interpretation, tailored toward studies in microbial ecology. At every step, we highlight computational methods that are potentially useful, for which we provide a short nontechnical description. We place this overview in the context of a number of open challenges to the field and offer further motivation for the use of standardized flow cytometry in microbial ecology research.

Indexed as

bioinformaticscytometrydata analysisfingerprintingmicrobial ecologymultivariate statisticssingle cell

Identifiers

PMID33468704
PMCPMC7820666

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.