ArticleBMC bioinformatics2024
Comparative study on chromatin loop callers using Hi-C data reveals their effectiveness.
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.
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.
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.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- CLASH (Chromatin Loop Across-sample Score Harmonizer) quantifies the relative contributions of genetic variation, methylation, and CTCF occupancy on chromatin loop strength across individuals.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Persistent homology-based multiscale Hi-C analysis uncovers TADs-mediated gene regulation.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Chromatin spatial analysis by METALoci unveils sex-determining 3D regulatory hubs.Nature structural & molecular biology · 2026Article
- Robin: an advanced tool for comparative loop caller result analysis leveraging large language models.NAR genomics and bioinformatics · 2026Article
- Loopsim: enrichment analysis of chromosome conformation capture with fast empirical distribution simulation.NAR genomics and bioinformatics · 2025Article
- MIA-Jet: Multi-scale Identification Algorithm of Chromatin Jets.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Genome Mountaineering: Expanding Horizons of the 3D Genome for the Intrepid Evolutionary Adventurer.Genome biology and evolution · 2025Review
- CGLoop: a neural network framework for chromatin loop prediction.BMC genomics · 2025Article
- DconnLoop: a deep learning model for predicting chromatin loops based on multi-source data integration.BMC bioinformatics · 2025Article
- Cellular mechanical memory: a potential tool for mesenchymal stem cell-based therapy.Stem cell research & therapy · 2025Review
- HiCForecast: dynamic network optical flow estimation algorithm for spatiotemporal Hi-C data forecasting.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2025Article
- Multiscale molecular modeling of chromatin with MultiMM: From nucleosomes to the whole genome.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
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
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.