ArticleNucleic acids research2025
On metrics for subpopulation detection in single-cell and spatial omics data.
Article in Nucleic acids research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Beyond benchmarking: an expert-guided consensus approach to spatially aware clustering.Nature methods · 2026Article
- Spatially-smoothed quantification improves cell typing in imaging mass cytometry datasets.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Beyond benchmarking: an expert-guided consensus approach to spatially aware clustering.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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Benchmarks are crucial to understanding the strengths and weaknesses of the growing number of tools for single-cell and spatial omics analysis. A key task is to distinguish subpopulations within complex tissues, where evaluation typically relies on external clustering validation metrics. Different metrics often lead to inconsistencies between rankings, highlighting the importance of understanding the behavior and biological implications of each metric. In this work, we provide a framework for systematically understanding and selecting validation metrics for single-cell data analysis, addressing tasks such as creating cell embeddings, constructing graphs, clustering, and spatial domain detection. Our discussion centers on the desirable properties of metrics, focusing on biological relevance and potential biases. Using this framework, we not only analyze existing metrics but also develop novel ones. Delving into domain detection in spatial omics data, we develop new external metrics tailored to spatially aware measurements. Additionally, a Bioconductor R package, poem, implements all the metrics discussed. While we focus on single-cell omics, much of the discussion is of broader relevance to other types of high-dimensional data.
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.