Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38236904›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

Kuura-An automated workflow for analyzing WES and WGS data.

Dhanaprakash Jambulingam, Venkat Subramaniam Rathinakannan, Samuel Heron, Johanna Schleutker, Vidal Fey

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2024. 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
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 47% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Dhanaprakash JambulingamInstitute of Biomedicine, Cancer Research Unit and FICAN West Cancer Centre, University of Turku and Turku University Hospital, Turku, Finland.ORCID 0000-0003-3318-5390
Venkat Subramaniam RathinakannanInstitute of Biomedicine, Cancer Research Unit and FICAN West Cancer Centre, University of Turku and Turku University Hospital, Turku, Finland.
Samuel HeronInstitute of Biomedicine, Cancer Research Unit and FICAN West Cancer Centre, University of Turku and Turku University Hospital, Turku, Finland.
Johanna SchleutkerInstitute of Biomedicine, Cancer Research Unit and FICAN West Cancer Centre, University of Turku and Turku University Hospital, Turku, Finland.
Vidal FeyInstitute of Biomedicine, Cancer Research Unit and FICAN West Cancer Centre, University of Turku and Turku University Hospital, Turku, Finland.ORCID 0000-0003-1388-5904
University of Turku · FI

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The advent of high-throughput sequencing technologies has revolutionized the field of genomic sciences by cutting down the cost and time associated with standard sequencing methods. This advancement has not only provided the research community with an abundance of data but has also presented the challenge of analyzing it. The paramount challenge in analyzing the copious amount of data is in using the optimal resources in terms of available tools. To address this research gap, we propose "Kuura-An automated workflow for analyzing WES and WGS data", which is optimized for both whole exome and whole genome sequencing data. This workflow is based on the nextflow pipeline scripting language and uses docker to manage and deploy the workflow. The workflow consists of four analysis stages-quality control, mapping to reference genome & quality score recalibration, variant calling & variant recalibration and variant consensus & annotation. An important feature of the DNA-seq workflow is that it uses the combination of multiple variant callers (GATK Haplotypecaller, DeepVariant, VarScan2, Freebayes and Strelka2), generating a list of high-confidence variants in a consensus call file. The workflow is flexible as it integrates the fragmented tools and can be easily extended by adding or updating tools or amending the parameters list. The use of a single parameters file enhances reproducibility of the results. The ease of deployment and usage of the workflow further increases computational reproducibility providing researchers with a standardized tool for the variant calling step in different projects. The source code, instructions for installation and use of the tool are publicly available at our github repository https://github.com/dhanaprakashj/kuura_pipeline.

Indexed as

Computational BiologySoftwareReproducibility of ResultsWhole Genome SequencingWorkflow

Identifiers

PMID38236904
PMCPMC10796025
OpenAlexW4390970065

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.