Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40594841›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Comparative study of tools for copy number variation detection using next-generation sequencing data.

Ruchao Du, Jinxin Dong, Hua Jiang, Minyong Qi, Zuyao Zhao

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. SSLCNV: A Semi-supervised Learning Framework for Accurate Copy Number Variation Detection.Interdisciplinary sciences, computational life sciences · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

5 authors.

Ruchao DuSchool of Computer Science and Technology, Liaocheng University, No. 34 Wenhua Road, Liaocheng, 252000, Shandong, China.
Jinxin DongSchool of Computer Science and Technology, Liaocheng University, No. 34 Wenhua Road, Liaocheng, 252000, Shandong, China. dongjinxin@lcu-cs.com.
Hua JiangSchool of Computer Science and Technology, Liaocheng University, No. 34 Wenhua Road, Liaocheng, 252000, Shandong, China. jianghua@lcu-cs.com.
Minyong QiSchool of Computer Science and Technology, Liaocheng University, No. 34 Wenhua Road, Liaocheng, 252000, Shandong, China.
Zuyao ZhaoOrthopedics Department, Liaocheng People's Hospital, Liaocheng, China.

Funding

Cloud Native Database Architecture Innovation and High Performance Core Technology Project ZTZB-23-990-024
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Copy number variation (CNV) plays an important role in disease susceptibility as a type of intermediate-scale structural variation (SV). Accurate CNV detection is crucial for understanding human genetic diversity, elucidating disease mechanisms, and advancing cancer genomics. A variety of CNV detection tools based on short sequencing reads from next-generation sequencing (NGS) have been developed. Although many researchers have conducted extensive comparisons of the detection performance of various tools, these studies have not fully considered the comprehensive impact of factors such as variant length, sequencing depth, tumor purity, and CNV types on tools performance. Therefore, we selected 12 widely used and representative detection tools to comprehensively compare their performance on both simulated and real data. For the simulated data, we compared their performance across six variant types under 36 configurations, including three variant lengths, four sequencing depths, and three tumor purities. For the real data, we used the overlapping density score (ODS) to evaluate the performance of the 12 detection tools. Additionally, we compared their time and space complexities. In this study, we analyzed the impact of each configuration on the tools and recommended the most suitable detection tools for each scenario. This study provides important guidance for researchers in selecting the appropriate variant detection tools for complex situations.

Indexed as

Computational BiologyDNA Copy Number VariationsHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingGenomicsHumansNeoplasmsSequence Analysis, DNACopy number variationNext-generation sequencingRecommendationSequencing depthTumor purityVariant length

Identifiers

PMID40594841
PMCPMC12218993

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.