ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2024
A model for accurate quantification of CRISPR effects in pooled FACS screens.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
CRISPR screens are powerful tools to identify key genes that underlie biological processes. One important type of screen uses fluorescence activated cell sorting (FACS) to sort perturbed cells into bins based on the expression level of marker genes, followed by guide RNA (gRNA) sequencing. Analysis of these data presents several statistical challenges due to multiple factors including the discrete nature of the bins and typically small numbers of replicate experiments. To address these challenges, we developed a robust and powerful Bayesian random effects model and software package called Waterbear. Furthermore, we used Waterbear to explore how various experimental design parameters affect statistical power to establish principled guidelines for future screens. Finally, we experimentally validated our experimental design model findings that, when using Waterbear for analysis, high power is maintained even at low cell coverage and a high multiplicity of infection. We anticipate that Waterbear will be of broad utility for analyzing FACS-based CRISPR screens.
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.