Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37829177›Full record

ArticleNAR genomics and bioinformatics2023

Benchmarking single-cell hashtag oligo demultiplexing methods.

George Howitt, Yuzhou Feng, Lucas Tobar, Dane Vassiliadis, Peter Hickey, Mark A Dawson, Sarath Ranganathan, Shivanthan Shanthikumar, Melanie Neeland, Jovana Maksimovic and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in NAR genomics and bioinformatics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
4.8field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. deMULTIplex2: robust sample demultiplexing for scRNA-seq.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2023
    Article
  18. 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

11 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

George HowittComputational Biology Program, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Parkville, VIC, 3010 Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2593-0189
Yuzhou FengComputational Biology Program, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Parkville, VIC, 3010 Australia.
Lucas TobarComputational Biology Program, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Parkville, VIC, 3010 Australia.
Dane VassiliadisComputational Biology Program, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Parkville, VIC, 3010 Australia.
Peter HickeyThe Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research, 1G Royal Parade, Parkville, VIC 3052, Australia.
Mark A DawsonSir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, 3010 Australia.
Sarath RanganathanRespiratory Diseases, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Parkville, VIC, Australia.
Shivanthan ShanthikumarRespiratory Diseases, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Parkville, VIC, Australia.
Melanie NeelandRespiratory Diseases, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Parkville, VIC, Australia.
Jovana MaksimovicComputational Biology Program, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Parkville, VIC, 3010 Australia.
Alicia OshlackComputational Biology Program, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Parkville, VIC, 3010 Australia.
The University of Melbourne · AURoyal Children's Hospital · AUPeter MacCallum Cancer Centre · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Sample multiplexing is often used to reduce cost and limit batch effects in single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) experiments. A commonly used multiplexing technique involves tagging cells prior to pooling with a hashtag oligo (HTO) that can be sequenced along with the cells' RNA to determine their sample of origin. Several tools have been developed to demultiplex HTO sequencing data and assign cells to samples. In this study, we critically assess the performance of seven HTO demultiplexing tools: hashedDrops, HTODemux, GMM-Demux, demuxmix, deMULTIplex, BFF (bimodal flexible fitting) and HashSolo. The comparison uses data sets where each sample has also been demultiplexed using genetic variants from the RNA, enabling comparison of HTO demultiplexing techniques against complementary data from the genetic 'ground truth'. We find that all methods perform similarly where HTO labelling is of high quality, but methods that assume a bimodal count distribution perform poorly on lower quality data. We also suggest heuristic approaches for assessing the quality of HTO counts in an scRNA-seq experiment.

Identifiers

PMID37829177
PMCPMC10566318
OpenAlexW4387516779

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.