ArticleBioinformatics advances2023
Benchmarking of microbiome detection tools on RNA-seq synthetic databases according to diverse conditions.
Article in Bioinformatics advances, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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.
- Analysis of unmapped RNA-seq data from cancer spatial transcriptome toward characterizing cancer microbiome.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Microbiomic and immunogenic biomarkers of adjuvant chemotherapy efficacy in stage III colorectal cancer.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2026Article
- Integrative analysis across metagenomic taxonomic classifiers: A case study of the gut microbiome in aging and longevity in the Integrative Longevity Omics Study.PLoS computational biology · 2026Article
- Fungi dominate eukaryotic microbial assemblages in hot spring biofilms of East and Southeast Asia.Environmental microbiome · 2025Article
- Impact of database choice and confidence score on the performance of taxonomic classification using Kraken2.aBIOTECH · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Motivation: Here, we performed a benchmarking analysis of five tools for microbe sequence detection using transcriptomics data (Kraken2, MetaPhlAn2, PathSeq, DRAC and Pandora). We built a synthetic database mimicking real-world structure with tuned conditions accounting for microbe species prevalence, base calling quality and sequence length. Sensitivity and positive predictive value (PPV) parameters, as well as computational requirements, were used for tool ranking. Results: GATK PathSeq showed the highest sensitivity on average and across all scenarios considered. However, the main drawback of this tool was its slowness. Kraken2 was the fastest tool and displayed the second-best sensitivity, though with large variance depending on the species to be classified. There was no significant difference for the other three algorithms sensitivity. The sensitivity of MetaPhlAn2 and Pandora was affected by sequence number and DRAC by sequence quality and length. Results from this study support the use of Kraken2 for routine microbiome profiling based on its competitive sensitivity and runtime performance. Nonetheless, we strongly endorse to complement it by combining with MetaPhlAn2 for thorough taxonomic analyses. Availability and implementation: https://github.com/fjuradorueda/MIME/ and https://github.com/lola4/DRAC/. Supplementary information: Supplementary data are available at
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.