ArticleFrontiers in bioinformatics2026
How benchmarking of bioinformatics tools is essential for informed workflow selection: a case study on SARS-CoV-2 subgenomic RNA detection.
Article in Frontiers in bioinformatics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Selecting appropriate bioinformatics tools is critical for accurate and reproducible analysis, particularly in support of genomic surveillance and molecular biomarker monitoring. The importance of these analyses is underscored by the need for effective public health responses to emerging diseases like SARS-CoV-2. Methods: By using the detection of SARS-CoV-2 subgenomic RNAs (sgRNAs) as a case study, we show the importance of systematic benchmarking in selecting optimal workflows. We generated 25 synthetic Illumina datasets simulating both shotgun and amplicon sequencing strategies, along with a real-world wastewater dataset. Using these datasets, we assessed the influence of key variables including mutation profiles, read lengths, aligner choice, and primer design for targeted sequencing. Results: Our results revealed substantial performance variability: common tools developed to identify sgRNAs struggled with shotgun data and were sensitive to mutations depending on the chosen aligner, while amplicon sequencing improved detection sensitivity, with aligners and primer design choices still significantly impacting outcomes. Discussion: Our results highlight the need for benchmarking steps and analyses to inform workflow selection. Without such evaluations, researchers risk drawing inaccurate conclusions from suboptimal workflows. This case study underscores the value of context-aware tool selection and encourages standardised benchmarking practices to ensure reproducibility and reliability in bioinformatics analysis, particularly in evidence-based decision-making environments such as public health and policymaking.
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.