↓ Skip to main content

Comparative evaluation of isoform-level gene expression estimation algorithms for RNA-seq and exon-array platforms

Overview of attention for article published in Briefings in Bioinformatics, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
24 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
141 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Comparative evaluation of isoform-level gene expression estimation algorithms for RNA-seq and exon-array platforms
Published in
Briefings in Bioinformatics, March 2016
DOI 10.1093/bib/bbw016
Pubmed ID
Authors

Matthew Dapas, Manoj Kandpal, Yingtao Bi, Ramana V Davuluri

Abstract

Given that the majority of multi-exon genes generate diverse functional products, it is important to evaluate expression at the isoform level. Previous studies have demonstrated strong gene-level correlations between RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) and microarray platforms, but have not studied their concordance at the isoform level. We performed transcript abundance estimation on raw RNA-seq and exon-array expression profiles available for common glioblastoma multiforme samples from The Cancer Genome Atlas using different analysis pipelines, and compared both the isoform- and gene-level expression estimates between programs and platforms. The results showed better concordance between RNA-seq/exon-array and reverse transcription-quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) platforms for fold change estimates than for raw abundance estimates, suggesting that fold change normalization against a control is an important step for integrating expression data across platforms. Based on RT-qPCR validations, eXpress and Multi-Mapping Bayesian Gene eXpression (MMBGX) programs achieved the best performance for RNA-seq and exon-array platforms, respectively, for deriving the isoform-level fold change values. While eXpress achieved the highest correlation with the RT-qPCR and exon-array (MMBGX) results overall, RSEM was more highly correlated with MMBGX for the subset of transcripts that are highly variable across the samples. eXpress appears to be most successful in discriminating lowly expressed transcripts, but IsoformEx and RSEM correlate more strongly with MMBGX for highly expressed transcripts. The results also reinforce how potentially important isoform-level expression changes can be masked by gene-level estimates, and demonstrate that exon arrays yield comparable results to RNA-seq for evaluating isoform-level expression changes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 24 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 141 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 4%
United Kingdom 2 1%
Germany 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Taiwan 1 <1%
Unknown 131 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 38 27%
Student > Ph. D. Student 32 23%
Other 15 11%
Student > Postgraduate 12 9%
Student > Master 12 9%
Other 21 15%
Unknown 11 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 48 34%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 45 32%
Computer Science 8 6%
Engineering 6 4%
Neuroscience 4 3%
Other 12 9%
Unknown 18 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 25. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 April 2016.
All research outputs
#1,405,112
of 24,140,950 outputs
Outputs from Briefings in Bioinformatics
#107
of 2,735 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#23,723
of 303,634 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Briefings in Bioinformatics
#5
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,140,950 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,735 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 303,634 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.