ReviewPLoS computational biology2022
Investigating differential abundance methods in microbiome data: A benchmark study.
Review in PLoS computational biology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 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
37 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- Maternal and infant gut microbiome.iMeta · 2026Review
- Article
- Host matters: coral reef fish species show distinct skin microbiome responses to upwelling-driven environmental changes.BMC microbiology · 2026Article
- A workflow for statistical analysis and visualization of microbiome omics data using the R microeco package.Nature protocols · 2026Review
- Cross-cohort resistome and virulome gradients structure the colorectal cancer microbiome.NPJ biofilms and microbiomes · 2026Article
- N2SIMBA: from Network topology to SIMulation of interactions and BActerial abundance, using microbial consumer resource model.Frontiers in bioinformatics · 2026Article
- Article
- Microbiome differential abundance methodologies to detect relevant taxa associated with chemotherapy toxicity rate in colorectal cancer.Bioinformatics advances · 2026Article
- The ocular surface microbiome of rhesus macaques.Animal microbiome · 2025Article
- metaGEENOME: an integrated framework for differential abundance analysis of microbiome data in cross-sectional and longitudinal studies.BMC bioinformatics · 2025Article
- Elementary methods provide more replicable results in microbial differential abundance analysis.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2025Article
- Microbial fuel cells to monitor natural attenuation around groundwater plumes.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2025Article
- Metagenomic analyses of gut microbiome composition and function with age in a wild bird; little change, except increased transposase gene abundance.ISME communications · 2025Article
- gLinDA: A privacy-preserving, swarm learning toolbox for differential abundance analysis of microbiomes.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2025Article
- Cefazolin shifts the kidney microbiota to promote a lithogenic environment.Nature communications · 2024Article
- Article
- Revisiting microgenderome: detecting and cataloguing sexually unique and enriched species in human microbiomes.BMC biology · 2024Article
- A novel computational approach for the mining of signature pathways using species co-occurrence networks in gut microbiomes.BMC microbiology · 2024Article
- Pregnancy during COVID 19 pandemic associated with differential gut microbiome composition as compared to pre-pandemic.Scientific reports · 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The development of increasingly efficient and cost-effective high throughput DNA sequencing techniques has enhanced the possibility of studying complex microbial systems. Recently, researchers have shown great interest in studying the microorganisms that characterise different ecological niches. Differential abundance analysis aims to find the differences in the abundance of each taxa between two classes of subjects or samples, assigning a significance value to each comparison. Several bioinformatic methods have been specifically developed, taking into account the challenges of microbiome data, such as sparsity, the different sequencing depth constraint between samples and compositionality. Differential abundance analysis has led to important conclusions in different fields, from health to the environment. However, the lack of a known biological truth makes it difficult to validate the results obtained. In this work we exploit metaSPARSim, a microbial sequencing count data simulator, to simulate data with differential abundance features between experimental groups. We perform a complete comparison of recently developed and established methods on a common benchmark with great effort to the reliability of both the simulated scenarios and the evaluation metrics. The performance overview includes the investigation of numerous scenarios, studying the effect on methods' results on the main covariates such as sample size, percentage of differentially abundant features, sequencing depth, feature variability, normalisation approach and ecological niches. Mainly, we find that methods show a good control of the type I error and, generally, also of the false discovery rate at high sample size, while recall seem to depend on the dataset and sample size.
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.