ArticleStatistics in medicine2022
Assessing reproducibility of high-throughput experiments in the case of missing data.
Article in Statistics in medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- ER-Localized DeadenylaseExploration (Beijing, China) · 2026Article
- Toxoplasma gondii chromatin remodeler SWI/SNF controls parasite division and gene expression.Nature communications · 2025Article
- SF3A3 Drives Tumorigenesis in Endometrial Cancer by Enhancing c-FOS Expression and Represents a Potential Therapeutic Target.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025Article
- Molecular mechanisms of surface antigen suppression by ApiAP2 and its implications for vaccine development.Veterinary research · 2025Article
- AP2XII-1 and AP2XI-2 Suppress Schizogony Gene Expression inInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
High-throughput experiments are an essential part of modern biological and biomedical research. The outcomes of high-throughput biological experiments often have a lot of missing observations due to signals below detection levels. For example, most single-cell RNA-seq (scRNA-seq) protocols experience high levels of dropout due to the small amount of starting material, leading to a majority of reported expression levels being zero. Though missing data contain information about reproducibility, they are often excluded in the reproducibility assessment, potentially generating misleading assessments. In this article, we develop a regression model to assess how the reproducibility of high-throughput experiments is affected by the choices of operational factors (eg, platform or sequencing depth) when a large number of measurements are missing. Using a latent variable approach, we extend correspondence curve regression, a recently proposed method for assessing the effects of operational factors to reproducibility, to incorporate missing values. Using simulations, we show that our method is more accurate in detecting differences in reproducibility than existing measures of reproducibility. We illustrate the usefulness of our method using a single-cell RNA-seq dataset collected on HCT116 cells. We compare the reproducibility of different library preparation platforms and study the effect of sequencing depth on reproducibility, thereby determining the cost-effective sequencing depth that is required to achieve sufficient reproducibility.
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.