ArticleBMC bioinformatics2025
Group-wise normalization in differential abundance analysis of microbiome samples.
Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- IRS: iterative reference selection improves normalization of microbiome sequencing data.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundA key challenge in differential abundance analysis (DAA) of microbial sequencing data is that the counts for each sample are compositional, resulting in potentially biased comparisons of the absolute abundance across study groups. Normalization-based DAA methods rely on external normalization factors that account for compositionality by standardizing the counts onto a common numerical scale. However, existing normalization methods have struggled to maintain the false discovery rate in settings where the variance or compositional bias is large. This article proposes a novel framework for normalization that can reduce bias in DAA by re-conceptualizing normalization as a group-level task. We present two new normalization methods within the group-wise framework: group-wise relative log expression (G-RLE) and fold-truncated sum scaling (FTSS).
resultsG-RLE and FTSS achieve higher statistical power for identifying differentially abundant taxa than existing methods in model-based and synthetic data simulation settings. The two novel methods also maintain the false discovery rate in challenging scenarios where existing methods suffer. The best results are obtained from using FTSS normalization with the DAA method MetagenomeSeq.
conclusionCompared with other methods for normalizing compositional sequence count data prior to DAA, the proposed group-level normalization frameworks offer more robust statistical inference. With a solid mathematical foundation, validated performance in numerical studies, and publicly available software, these new methods can help improve rigor and reproducibility in microbiome research.
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.