Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38134031›Full record

ArticlePloS one2023

Reproducibility in cytometry: Signals analysis and its connection to uncertainty quantification.

Paul N Patrone, Matthew DiSalvo, Anthony J Kearsley, Geoffrey B McFadden, Gregory A Cooksey

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

5 authors.

Paul N PatroneNational Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-9446-8186
Matthew DiSalvoNational Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD, United States of America.
Anthony J KearsleyNational Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-9576-0621
Geoffrey B McFaddenNational Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD, United States of America.
Gregory A CookseyNational Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-0200-2715

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Signals analysis for cytometry remains a challenging task that has a significant impact on uncertainty. Conventional cytometers assume that individual measurements are well characterized by simple properties such as the signal area, width, and height. However, these approaches have difficulty distinguishing inherent biological variability from instrument artifacts and operating conditions. As a result, it is challenging to quantify uncertainty in the properties of individual cells and perform tasks such as doublet deconvolution. We address these problems via signals analysis techniques that use scale transformations to: (I) separate variation in biomarker expression from effects due to flow conditions and particle size; (II) quantify reproducibility associated with a given laser interrogation region; (III) estimate uncertainty in measurement values on a per-event basis; and (IV) extract the singlets that make up a multiplet. The key idea behind this approach is to model how variable operating conditions deform the signal shape and then use constrained optimization to "undo" these deformations for measured signals; residuals to this process characterize reproducibility. Using a recently developed microfluidic cytometer, we demonstrate that these techniques can account for instrument and measurand induced variability with a residual uncertainty of less than 2.5% in the signal shape and less than 1% in integrated area.

Indexed as

Reproducibility of ResultsFlow CytometryParticle SizeUncertainty

Identifiers

PMID38134031
PMCPMC10745152

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC0
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.