Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38515011›Full record

ArticleBMC bioinformatics2024

Comparative study on chromatin loop callers using Hi-C data reveals their effectiveness.

H M A Mohit Chowdhury, Terrance Boult, Oluwatosin Oluwadare

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. MIA-Jet: Multi-scale Identification Algorithm of Chromatin Jets.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. 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

3 authors.

H M A Mohit ChowdhuryDepartment of Computer Science, University of Colorado at Colorado Springs, 1420 Austin Bluffs Pkwy, Colorado Springs, CO, 80918, USA.
Terrance BoultDepartment of Computer Science, University of Colorado at Colorado Springs, 1420 Austin Bluffs Pkwy, Colorado Springs, CO, 80918, USA.
Oluwatosin OluwadareDepartment of Computer Science, University of Colorado at Colorado Springs, 1420 Austin Bluffs Pkwy, Colorado Springs, CO, 80918, USA. ooluwada@uccs.edu.

Funding

Can one size fit all? - High-Resolution 3D Genome Spatial Organization Inference with Generalizable ModelsR35GM150402 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS · PI Oluwatosin Oluwadare · 2023 to 2026
$1.3M
NIGMS NIH HHS R35 GM150402NIGMS NIH HHS R35GM150402
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundChromosome is one of the most fundamental part of cell biology where DNA holds the hierarchical information. DNA compacts its size by forming loops, and these regions house various protein particles, including CTCF, SMC3, H3 histone. Numerous sequencing methods, such as Hi-C, ChIP-seq, and Micro-C, have been developed to investigate these properties. Utilizing these data, scientists have developed a variety of loop prediction techniques that have greatly improved their methods for characterizing loop prediction and related aspects.

resultsIn this study, we categorized 22 loop calling methods and conducted a comprehensive study of 11 of them. Additionally, we have provided detailed insights into the methodologies underlying these algorithms for loop detection, categorizing them into five distinct groups based on their fundamental approaches. Furthermore, we have included critical information such as resolution, input and output formats, and parameters. For this analysis, we utilized the GM12878 Hi-C datasets at 5 KB, 10 KB, 100 KB and 250 KB resolutions. Our evaluation criteria encompassed various factors, including memory usages, running time, sequencing depth, and recovery of protein-specific sites such as CTCF, H3K27ac, and RNAPII.

conclusionThis analysis offers insights into the loop detection processes of each method, along with the strengths and weaknesses of each, enabling readers to effectively choose suitable methods for their datasets. We evaluate the capabilities of these tools and introduce a novel Biological, Consistency, and Computational robustness score (

Indexed as

ChromatinChromosomesAlgorithmsChromatin Immunoprecipitation SequencingDNAChromatinDNAChromatinChromosomeClassificationClusteringComputer visionDNAHi-CLoopMachine learningProbability

Identifiers

PMID38515011
PMCPMC10958853

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.