409 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26510841)
1. VariantMetaCaller: automated fusion of variant calling pipelines for quantitative, precision-based filtering.
Gézsi A; Bolgár B; Marx P; Sarkozy P; Szalai C; Antal P
BMC Genomics; 2015 Oct; 16():875. PubMed ID: 26510841
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Impact of post-alignment processing in variant discovery from whole exome data.
Tian S; Yan H; Kalmbach M; Slager SL
BMC Bioinformatics; 2016 Oct; 17(1):403. PubMed ID: 27716037
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Detailed simulation of cancer exome sequencing data reveals differences and common limitations of variant callers.
Hofmann AL; Behr J; Singer J; Kuipers J; Beisel C; Schraml P; Moch H; Beerenwinkel N
BMC Bioinformatics; 2017 Jan; 18(1):8. PubMed ID: 28049408
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Variant callers for next-generation sequencing data: a comparison study.
Liu X; Han S; Wang Z; Gelernter J; Yang BZ
PLoS One; 2013; 8(9):e75619. PubMed ID: 24086590
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. GATK hard filtering: tunable parameters to improve variant calling for next generation sequencing targeted gene panel data.
De Summa S; Malerba G; Pinto R; Mori A; Mijatovic V; Tommasi S
BMC Bioinformatics; 2017 Mar; 18(Suppl 5):119. PubMed ID: 28361668
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. An analytical workflow for accurate variant discovery in highly divergent regions.
Tian S; Yan H; Neuhauser C; Slager SL
BMC Genomics; 2016 Sep; 17(1):703. PubMed ID: 27590916
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. From Wet-Lab to Variations: Concordance and Speed of Bioinformatics Pipelines for Whole Genome and Whole Exome Sequencing.
Laurie S; Fernandez-Callejo M; Marco-Sola S; Trotta JR; Camps J; Chacón A; Espinosa A; Gut M; Gut I; Heath S; Beltran S
Hum Mutat; 2016 Dec; 37(12):1263-1271. PubMed ID: 27604516
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Validation and assessment of variant calling pipelines for next-generation sequencing.
Pirooznia M; Kramer M; Parla J; Goes FS; Potash JB; McCombie WR; Zandi PP
Hum Genomics; 2014 Jul; 8(1):14. PubMed ID: 25078893
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Systematic comparison of variant calling pipelines using gold standard personal exome variants.
Hwang S; Kim E; Lee I; Marcotte EM
Sci Rep; 2015 Dec; 5():17875. PubMed ID: 26639839
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Detailed comparison of two popular variant calling packages for exome and targeted exon studies.
Warden CD; Adamson AW; Neuhausen SL; Wu X
PeerJ; 2014; 2():e600. PubMed ID: 25289185
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Challenges in exome analysis by LifeScope and its alternative computational pipelines.
Pranckevičiene E; Rančelis T; Pranculis A; Kučinskas V
BMC Res Notes; 2015 Sep; 8():421. PubMed ID: 26346699
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. ReliableGenome: annotation of genomic regions with high/low variant calling concordance.
Popitsch N; ; Schuh A; Taylor JC
Bioinformatics; 2017 Jan; 33(2):155-160. PubMed ID: 27605105
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. A Comparison of Variant Calling Pipelines Using Genome in a Bottle as a Reference.
Cornish A; Guda C
Biomed Res Int; 2015; 2015():456479. PubMed ID: 26539496
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Systematic benchmark of state-of-the-art variant calling pipelines identifies major factors affecting accuracy of coding sequence variant discovery.
Barbitoff YA; Abasov R; Tvorogova VE; Glotov AS; Predeus AV
BMC Genomics; 2022 Feb; 23(1):155. PubMed ID: 35193511
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Performance evaluation of pipelines for mapping, variant calling and interval padding, for the analysis of NGS germline panels.
Zanti M; Michailidou K; Loizidou MA; Machattou C; Pirpa P; Christodoulou K; Spyrou GM; Kyriacou K; Hadjisavvas A
BMC Bioinformatics; 2021 Apr; 22(1):218. PubMed ID: 33910496
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Low concordance of multiple variant-calling pipelines: practical implications for exome and genome sequencing.
O'Rawe J; Jiang T; Sun G; Wu Y; Wang W; Hu J; Bodily P; Tian L; Hakonarson H; Johnson WE; Wei Z; Wang K; Lyon GJ
Genome Med; 2013; 5(3):28. PubMed ID: 23537139
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Benchmarking workflows to assess performance and suitability of germline variant calling pipelines in clinical diagnostic assays.
Krishnan V; Utiramerur S; Ng Z; Datta S; Snyder MP; Ashley EA
BMC Bioinformatics; 2021 Feb; 22(1):85. PubMed ID: 33627090
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. FVC as an adaptive and accurate method for filtering variants from popular NGS analysis pipelines.
Ren Y; Kong Y; Zhou X; Genchev GZ; Zhou C; Zhao H; Lu H
Commun Biol; 2022 Sep; 5(1):975. PubMed ID: 36114280
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. tarSVM: Improving the accuracy of variant calls derived from microfluidic PCR-based targeted next generation sequencing using a support vector machine.
Gillies CE; Otto EA; Vega-Warner V; Robertson CC; Sanna-Cherchi S; Gharavi A; Crawford B; Bhimma R; Winkler C; ; ; Kang HM; Sampson MG
BMC Bioinformatics; 2016 Jun; 17(1):233. PubMed ID: 27287006
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Comparison among three variant callers and assessment of the accuracy of imputation from SNP array data to whole-genome sequence level in chicken.
Ni G; Strom TM; Pausch H; Reimer C; Preisinger R; Simianer H; Erbe M
BMC Genomics; 2015 Oct; 16():824. PubMed ID: 26486989
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
