ArticleGenome research2026
Minimizing reference bias with an imputed personalized reference.
Article in Genome research, 2026. 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.
- The promise of long-read RNA-seq: reducing bias in analyses of allele imbalance.NAR genomics and bioinformatics · 2026Article
- Building and applying pangenome references to capture genetic diversity.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2026Review
- Integer programming framework for pangenome-based genome inference.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Pangenome indexes reduce reference bias in sequencing data analysis. However, bias can be reduced further by using a personalized reference, for example, a diploid human reference constructed to match a donor individual's alleles. Here, we present a new impute-first alignment framework that combines elements of genotype imputation and read alignment. We first genotype the individual using a subsample of the input reads. Using a reference panel and an efficient imputation algorithm, we impute a personalized diploid reference. Finally, we index the personalized reference and apply a read aligner (either linear or graph) to align the full read set to the personalized reference. On the HG002 sample, this framework achieves a higher variant-calling F1-score (99.77%) compared with the traditional linear aligner (99.62%), graph pangenome aligner (99.72%), and graph personalized-pangenome aligner (99.75%), with substantial reduction in the number of errors (38.73% vs. a linear aligner, 14.97% vs. a graph aligner, and 6.05% vs. a personalized graph). An imputed reference can have comparable efficiency to a pangenome reference, making it an overall advantageous choice for whole-genome DNA sequencing experiments. Advantages of our impute-first approach include that (1) it fully considers linkage disequilibrium and produces a phased diploid reference as an output; (2) it produces accurate personalized references even from low-coverage data; and (3) it is compatible with both graph and linear reference representations, achieving its highest variant-calling F1 accuracy using a standard linear aligner (BWA-MEM).
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.