Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36131234›Full record

ArticleBMC bioinformatics2022

Evaluation of classification in single cell atac-seq data with machine learning methods.

Hongzhe Guo, Zhongbo Yang, Tao Jiang, Shiqi Liu, Yadong Wang, Zhe Cui

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

6 authors.

Hongzhe Guo *Faculty of Computing, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin, 150001, China.
Zhongbo Yang *Faculty of Computing, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin, 150001, China.
Tao JiangFaculty of Computing, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin, 150001, China.
Shiqi LiuFaculty of Computing, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin, 150001, China.
Yadong WangFaculty of Computing, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin, 150001, China. ydwang@hit.edu.cn.
Zhe CuiFaculty of Computing, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin, 150001, China. cuizhe@hit.edu.cn.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8398-3537

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe technologies advances of single-cell Assay for Transposase Accessible Chromatin using sequencing (scATAC-seq) allowed to generate thousands of single cells in a relatively easy and economic manner and it is rapidly advancing the understanding of the cellular composition of complex organisms and tissues. The data structure and feature in scRNA-seq is similar to that in scATAC-seq, therefore, it's encouraged to identify and classify the cell types in scATAC-seq through traditional supervised machine learning methods, which are proved reliable in scRNA-seq datasets.

resultsIn this study, we evaluated the classification performance of 6 well-known machine learning methods on scATAC-seq. A total of 4 public scATAC-seq datasets vary in tissues, sizes and technologies were applied to the evaluation of the performance of the methods. We assessed these methods using a 5-folds cross validation experiment, called intra-dataset experiment, based on recall, precision and the percentage of correctly predicted cells. The results show that these methods performed well in some specific types of the cell in a specific scATAC-seq dataset, while the overall performance is not as well as that in scRNA-seq analysis. In addition, we evaluated the classification performance of these methods by training and predicting in different datasets generated from same sample, called inter-datasets experiments, which may help us to assess the performance of these methods in more realistic scenarios.

conclusionsBoth in intra-dataset and in inter-dataset experiment, SVM and NMC are overall outperformed others across all 4 datasets. Thus, we recommend researchers to use SVM and NMC as the underlying classifier when developing an automatic cell-type classification method for scATAC-seq.

Indexed as

Chromatin Immunoprecipitation SequencingSingle-Cell AnalysisChromatinMachine LearningChromatinCell-type classificationEvaluationMachine learningscATAC-seqSVM

Identifiers

PMID36131234
PMCPMC9494763

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.