Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35753702›Full record

ReviewBriefings in bioinformatics2022

A comprehensive comparison on cell-type composition inference for spatial transcriptomics data.

Jiawen Chen, Weifang Liu, Tianyou Luo, Zhentao Yu, Minzhi Jiang, Jia Wen, Gaorav P Gupta, Paola Giusti, Hongtu Zhu, Yuchen Yang and 1 more

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Briefings in bioinformatics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 57 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
57citing papers in PubMed
6.0field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

57 citing papers in PubMed, 72 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

11 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Jiawen ChenDepartment of Biostatistics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6193-534X
Weifang LiuDepartment of Biostatistics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2278-8946
Tianyou LuoDepartment of Biostatistics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.
Zhentao YuDepartment of Biostatistics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.
Minzhi JiangDepartment of Applied Physical Sciences, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.
Jia WenDepartment of Genetics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.
Gaorav P GuptaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27514, USA.
Paola GiustiDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA.
Hongtu ZhuDepartment of Biostatistics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.
Yuchen YangState Key Laboratory of Biocontrol, School of Ecology, Sun Yat-sen University, 510275 Guangzhou, China.
Yun LiDepartment of Biostatistics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9275-4189
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · USSun Yat-sen University · CNUniversity of Florida · US

Funding

Preclinical CoreP50HD103573 · NICHD · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI Mark D Shen · 2020 to 2026
$9.7M
Polygenic risk scores for cardiometabolic disorders: the role of blood cells immune response and evolutionary adaptationU01HG011720 · NHGRI · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI Yun Li, ALEXANDER P REINER · 2021 to 2026
$5.4M
Charting the 3D epigenome in human brain development and diseasesU01DA052713 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI KRIEGSTEIN, ARNOLD, SHEN, YIN · 2020 to 2024
$3.4M
NHGRI NIH HHS U01 HG011720NICHD NIH HHS P50 HD103573NIDA NIH HHS U01 DA052713
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Spatial transcriptomics (ST) technologies allow researchers to examine transcriptional profiles along with maintained positional information. Such spatially resolved transcriptional characterization of intact tissue samples provides an integrated view of gene expression in its natural spatial and functional context. However, high-throughput sequencing-based ST technologies cannot yet reach single cell resolution. Thus, similar to bulk RNA-seq data, gene expression data at ST spot-level reflect transcriptional profiles of multiple cells and entail the inference of cell-type composition within each ST spot for valid and powerful subsequent analyses. Realizing the critical importance of cell-type decomposition, multiple groups have developed ST deconvolution methods. The aim of this work is to review state-of-the-art methods for ST deconvolution, comparing their strengths and weaknesses. In particular, we construct ST spots from single-cell level ST data to assess the performance of 10 methods, with either ideal reference or non-ideal reference. Furthermore, we examine the performance of these methods on spot- and bead-level ST data by comparing estimated cell-type proportions to carefully matched single-cell ST data. In comparing the performance on various tissues and technological platforms, we concluded that RCTD and stereoscope achieve more robust and accurate inferences.

Indexed as

Gene Expression ProfilingTranscriptomeHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingSequence Analysis, RNAcell-type deconvolutiondeep learningprobabilistic modelingsingle-cellspatial transcriptomics

Identifiers

PMID35753702
PMCPMC9294426
OpenAlexW4283579418

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.