Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39080559›Full record

ArticleBMC bioinformatics2024

Feature selection followed by a novel residuals-based normalization that includes variance stabilization simplifies and improves single-cell gene expression analysis.

Amartya Singh, Hossein Khiabanian

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 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Amartya SinghCenter for Systems and Computational Biology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, USA. as2197@scarletmail.rutgers.edu.
Hossein KhiabanianCenter for Systems and Computational Biology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, USA.

Funding

Evolution and clinical impact of clonal hematopoiesis of indeterminate potential in breast tumor microenvironmentR01CA233662 · NCI · RUTGERS BIOMEDICAL AND HEALTH SCIENCES · PI GANESAN, SHRIDAR · 2019 to 2023
$3.2M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA233662New Jersey Commission on Cancer Research COCR23PRG006NIH HHS P30CA07272V Foundation T2019-01
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Normalization is a crucial step in the analysis of single-cell RNA-sequencing (scRNA-seq) counts data. Its principal objectives are reduction of systematic biases primarily introduced through technical sources and transformation of counts to make them more amenable for the application of established statistical frameworks. In the standard workflows, normalization is followed by feature selection to identify highly variable genes (HVGs) that capture most of the biologically meaningful variation across the cells. Here, we make the case for a revised workflow by proposing a simple feature selection method and showing that we can perform feature selection before normalization by relying on observed counts. We highlight that the feature selection step can be used to not only select HVGs but to also identify stable genes. We further propose a novel variance stabilization transformation inclusive residuals-based normalization method that in fact relies on the stable genes to inform the reduction of systematic biases. We demonstrate significant improvements in downstream clustering analyses through the application of our proposed methods on biological truth-known as well as simulated counts datasets. We have implemented this novel workflow for analyzing high-throughput scRNA-seq data in an R package called Piccolo.

Indexed as

Gene Expression ProfilingSingle-Cell Gene Expression AnalysisAlgorithmsCluster AnalysisHumansSequence Analysis, RNASoftware

Identifiers

PMID39080559
PMCPMC11290295

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.