ArticleBriefings in bioinformatics2022
Replicability in cancer omics data analysis: measures and empirical explorations.
Article 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 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.
- A scoping review on metrics to quantify reproducibility: a multitude of questions leads to a multitude of metrics.Royal Society open science · 2025Review
- Replicability of bulk RNA-Seq differential expression and enrichment analysis results for small cohort sizes.PLoS computational biology · 2025Article
- Mutual-assistance learning for trustworthy biomarker discovery and disease prediction.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2025Article
- A Selective Review of Network Analysis Methods for Gene Expression Data.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2025Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In biomedical research, the replicability of findings across studies is highly desired. In this study, we focus on cancer omics data, for which the examination of replicability has been mostly focused on important omics variables identified in different studies. In published literature, although there have been extensive attention and ad hoc discussions, there is insufficient quantitative research looking into replicability measures and their properties. The goal of this study is to fill this important knowledge gap. In particular, we consider three sensible replicability measures, for which we examine distributional properties and develop a way of making inference. Applying them to three The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) datasets reveals in general low replicability and significant across-data variations. To further comprehend such findings, we resort to simulation, which confirms the validity of the findings with the TCGA data and further informs the dependence of replicability on signal level (or equivalently sample size). Overall, this study can advance our understanding of replicability for cancer omics and other studies that have identification as a key goal.
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.