Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36385170›Full record

ArticleMolecular psychiatry2023

Power and optimal study design in iPSC-based brain disease modelling.

Jessie W Brunner, Hanna C A Lammertse, Annemiek A van Berkel, Frank Koopmans, Ka Wan Li, August B Smit, Ruud F Toonen, Matthijs Verhage, Sophie van der Sluis

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Molecular psychiatry, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

35 citing papers in PubMed, 48 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. A comprehensive guide to genomeZhong nan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Central South University. Medical sciences · 2025
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  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

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Jessie W Brunner *Dept. Functional Genomics, CNCR, VU University Amsterdam, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Hanna C A Lammertse *Dept. Functional Genomics, CNCR, VU University Amsterdam, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-5452-5000
Annemiek A van Berkel *Dept. Functional Genomics, CNCR, VU University Amsterdam, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Frank KoopmansDept. Functional Genomics, CNCR, VU University Amsterdam, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-4973-5732
Ka Wan LiDept. Molecular & Cellular Neurobiology, CNCR, VU University Amsterdam, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
August B SmitDept. Molecular & Cellular Neurobiology, CNCR, VU University Amsterdam, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-2286-1587
Ruud F ToonenDept. Functional Genomics, CNCR, VU University Amsterdam, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Matthijs VerhageDept. Functional Genomics, CNCR, VU University Amsterdam, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. m.verhage@vu.nl.ORCID 0000-0002-6085-7503
Sophie van der SluisDept. Complex Trait Genetics, CNCR, VU University Amsterdam, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. s.vander.sluis@vu.nl.ORCID 0000-0001-9958-7216
Cancer Genomics Centre · NLVrije Universiteit Amsterdam · NLAmsterdam Neuroscience · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Studies using induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) are gaining momentum in brain disorder modelling, but optimal study designs are poorly defined. Here, we compare commonly used designs and statistical analysis for different research aims. Furthermore, we generated immunocytochemical, electrophysiological, and proteomic data from iPSC-derived neurons of five healthy subjects, analysed data variation and conducted power simulations. These analyses show that published case-control iPSC studies are generally underpowered. Designs using isogenic iPSC lines typically have higher power than case-control designs, but generalization of conclusions is limited. We show that, for the realistic settings used in this study, a multiple isogenic pair design increases absolute power up to 60% or requires up to 5-fold fewer lines. A free web tool is presented to explore the power of different study designs, using any (pilot) data.

Indexed as

Brain DiseasesInduced Pluripotent Stem CellsCase-Control StudiesHealthy VolunteersHumansProteomics

Identifiers

PMID36385170
PMCPMC10208961
OpenAlexW4309246465

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.