ArticleBMC genomics2025
Leveraging two novel droplet-based single-cell RNA Sequencing platforms: a comparative study with 10x genomics.
Article in BMC genomics, 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.
- Single-cell RNA sequencing in ovarian cancer: decoding the tumor microenvironment for personalized therapy.Journal of ovarian research · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCurrently, single cell transcriptome profiling technology is gaining popularity, with an increasing number of novel platforms emerging. The development of new technologies is aimed at improving data quality, scale, cost, or labor intensity. Given the rapid evolution of these technologies, a comprehensive and independent comparison of platforms is crucial to identify the most suitable one for studying various biological objects and achieving specific experimental goals.
resultsHere we performed a comparison of two droplet-based high-throughput single-cell platforms, namely, SeekOne and MobiDrop with a widely-used commercial platform from 10× Genomics. The use of different types of samples allowed us to evaluate the performance of the platforms on cell suspensions of varying complexity and quality. 10× showed generally superior performance, although all platforms compared in this study showed acceptable gene yield and allowed identification of all expected cell types. Taking into account the cost and availability of devices and reagents required for each platform and the flexibility in the number of samples loaded onto the chip, SeekOne and MobiDrop might serve as a good alternative.
conclusionsThe results of the current comparison will support the community's efforts to compare different aspects, including sample amount requirements, throughput, cell quality, gene capture efficiency and cell type representativeness.
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.