Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38261342›Full record

ReviewBriefings in bioinformatics2024

From G1 to M: a comparative study of methods for identifying cell cycle phases.

Xinyu Guo, Liang Chen

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Briefings in bioinformatics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. 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

2 authors.

Xinyu GuoDepartment of Quantitative and Computational Biology, University of Southern California, 1050 Childs Way, Los Angeles, CA 90089, United States.
Liang ChenDepartment of Quantitative and Computational Biology, University of Southern California, 1050 Childs Way, Los Angeles, CA 90089, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-6164-4553

Funding

The Role of NMD in Cortical Neural Progenitor CellsR01NS125276 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA RIVERSIDE · PI Sika Zheng · 2022 to 2026
$2.6M
The Regulation and Function of Neuron-Specific Alternative SplicingR01NS104041 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA RIVERSIDE · PI ZHENG, SIKA · 2018 to 2022
$2.1M
Understanding the NMD regulatory path from genetic variation to phenotypesR01GM137428 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI CHEN, LIANG · 2020 to 2023
$1.6M
NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM137428NIH HHS R01GM137428NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS104041NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS125276
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Accurate identification of cell cycle phases in single-cell RNA-sequencing (scRNA-seq) data is crucial for biomedical research. Many methods have been developed to tackle this challenge, employing diverse approaches to predict cell cycle phases. In this review article, we delve into the standard processes in identifying cell cycle phases within scRNA-seq data and present several representative methods for comparison. To rigorously assess the accuracy of these methods, we propose an error function and employ multiple benchmarking datasets encompassing human and mouse data. Our evaluation results reveal a key finding: the fit between the reference data and the dataset being analyzed profoundly impacts the effectiveness of cell cycle phase identification methods. Therefore, researchers must carefully consider the compatibility between the reference data and their dataset to achieve optimal results. Furthermore, we explore the potential benefits of incorporating benchmarking data with multiple known cell cycle phases into the analysis. Merging such data with the target dataset shows promise in enhancing prediction accuracy. By shedding light on the accuracy and performance of cell cycle phase prediction methods across diverse datasets, this review aims to motivate and guide future methodological advancements. Our findings offer valuable insights for researchers seeking to improve their understanding of cellular dynamics through scRNA-seq analysis, ultimately fostering the development of more robust and widely applicable cell cycle identification methods.

Indexed as

BenchmarkingBiomedical ResearchAnimalsCell CycleHumansMiceResearch Personnelcell cycle phase predictiondata integrationenrichment scoresingle-cell RNA-seqtransfer learning

Identifiers

PMID38261342
PMCPMC10805071

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.