ArticleScientific reports2021
Design considerations for workflow management systems use in production genomics research and the clinic.
Article in Scientific reports, 2021. 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.
- Eras of bioinformatics technologies from command-line interfaces to artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2026Review
- A scoping review of approaches to evaluating workflow management systems for bioinformatics users.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2026Article
- systemPipeR: a multipurpose workflow management system for reproducible data analysis.NAR genomics and bioinformatics · 2026Article
- From Bench to Insight: Rapid Pathogen Genomic Surveillance Workflow for SARS-CoV-2 and Emerging Pathogens.Genes · 2026Article
- Managing workflow executions with WESkit.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- 2Pipe starts with a question: matching you with the correct pipeline for MAG reconstruction.mSystems · 2026Review
- CBIcall: a configuration-driven framework for variant calling in large sequencing cohorts.Bioinformatics advances · 2026Article
- rMAP-Candida: a modular Dockerized WDL/Cromwell workflow for reproducibleFrontiers in bioinformatics · 2026Article
- Next generation sequencing and beyond: a review of genomic sequencing methods.Functional & integrative genomics · 2025Article
- User-friendly scheduler Using a hybrid architecture and supercomputing for big data processing.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Fundamentals of FAIR biomedical data analyses in the cloud using custom pipelines.PLoS computational biology · 2025Article
- DeBasher: a flow-based programming bash extension for the implementation of complex and interactive workflows with stateful processes.BMC bioinformatics · 2025Article
- MAMS: matrix and analysis metadata standards to facilitate harmonization and reproducibility of single-cell data.Genome biology · 2024Article
- Ten quick tips for building FAIR workflows.PLoS computational biology · 2023Article
- Accelerating bioinformatics implementation in public health.Microbial genomics · 2023Article
- The use of predictive models to develop chromatography-based purification processes.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The changing landscape of genomics research and clinical practice has created a need for computational pipelines capable of efficiently orchestrating complex analysis stages while handling large volumes of data across heterogeneous computational environments. Workflow Management Systems (WfMSs) are the software components employed to fill this gap. This work provides an approach and systematic evaluation of key features of popular bioinformatics WfMSs in use today: Nextflow, CWL, and WDL and some of their executors, along with Swift/T, a workflow manager commonly used in high-scale physics applications. We employed two use cases: a variant-calling genomic pipeline and a scalability-testing framework, where both were run locally, on an HPC cluster, and in the cloud. This allowed for evaluation of those four WfMSs in terms of language expressiveness, modularity, scalability, robustness, reproducibility, interoperability, ease of development, along with adoption and usage in research labs and healthcare settings. This article is trying to answer, which WfMS should be chosen for a given bioinformatics application regardless of analysis type?. The choice of a given WfMS is a function of both its intrinsic language and engine features. Within bioinformatics, where analysts are a mix of dry and wet lab scientists, the choice is also governed by collaborations and adoption within large consortia and technical support provided by the WfMS team/community. As the community and its needs continue to evolve along with computational infrastructure, WfMSs will also evolve, especially those with permissive licenses that allow commercial use. In much the same way as the dataflow paradigm and containerization are now well understood to be very useful in bioinformatics applications, we will continue to see innovations of tools and utilities for other purposes, like big data technologies, interoperability, and provenance.
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.