ArticleBriefings in bioinformatics2024
Thinking points for effective batch correction on biomedical data.
Article 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 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Meta-analysis of genomic characteristics for antiviral influenza defective interfering particle prioritization.NAR genomics and bioinformatics · 2025Pooled it
- Changes in transposable elements expression in male and female mice liver throughout aging.GeroScience · 2026Article
- Cell-based therapies of autoimmune diseases in the context of artificial intelligence development.Clinical and experimental medicine · 2026Review
- Enabling cross-indication protein expression analysis using a curated pan-cancer dataset and a tailored workflow.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- ABaCo: addressing heterogeneity challenges in metagenomic data integration with adversarial generative models.Nucleic acids research · 2026Article
- AI-Guided Discovery of Oncogenic Signaling Crosstalk in Tumor Progression and Drug Resistance.Oncology research · 2026Review
- Identification and clinical validation of F3 as a peripheral blood biomarker for neonatal hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy using dataset-specific bioinformatics analysis.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Article
- From forest to farm: the impact of a broad spectrum of lifestyles on the porcine gut microbiota.Current research in microbial sciences · 2026Article
- Gut microbiota and osteoarthritis: mechanisms and translation.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Mapping the circulating proteome across neurodegeneration: A harmonized, consortium-scale framework for uncovering molecular pathophysiology.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
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
Batch effects introduce significant variability into high-dimensional data, complicating accurate analysis and leading to potentially misleading conclusions if not adequately addressed. Despite technological and algorithmic advancements in biomedical research, effectively managing batch effects remains a complex challenge requiring comprehensive considerations. This paper underscores the necessity of a flexible and holistic approach for selecting batch effect correction algorithms (BECAs), advocating for proper BECA evaluations and consideration of artificial intelligence-based strategies. We also discuss key challenges in batch effect correction, including the importance of uncovering hidden batch factors and understanding the impact of design imbalance, missing values, and aggressive correction. Our aim is to provide researchers with a robust framework for effective batch effects management and enhancing the reliability of high-dimensional data analyses.
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.