ReviewmSystems2026
2Pipe starts with a question: matching you with the correct pipeline for MAG reconstruction.
Review in mSystems, 2026. 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.
- Community-driven updates for comprehensive long-read metagenomics and enhanced binning in nf-core/mag v5.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Whole-genome sequencing has boosted our ability to explore microbial diversity by enabling the recovery of metagenome-assembled genomes (MAGs) directly from environmental DNA. As a result, the vast availability of sequencing data has prompted the development of numerous bioinformatics pipelines for MAG reconstruction, along with challenges to identify the most suitable pipeline to perform the analysis according to the user needs. This report briefly discusses the computational requirements of these pipelines; presents the variety of interfaces, workflow managers, and package managers they feature; and describes the typical modular structure. Also, it provides a compacted technical overview of 41 publicly available pipelines or platforms to build MAGs starting from short and/or long sequences. Moreover, recognizing the overwhelming number of factors to consider when selecting an appropriate pipeline, we introduce an interactive decision-support web application, 2Pipe, that helps users to identify a suitable workflow based on their input data characteristics, desired outcomes, and computational constraints. The tool presents a question-driven interface to customize the recommendation, a pipeline gallery to offer a summarized description, and a pipeline comparison based on key factors used for the questionnaire. Beyond this and foreseeing the release of novel pipelines in the near future, we include a quick form and detailed instructions for developers to append their workflow in the application. Altogether, this review and the application equip the researchers with a general outlook of the growing metagenomics pipeline landscape and guide the users toward deciding the workflow that best fits their expectations and infrastructure.
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.