364 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33627090)
1. 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]
2. 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]
3. 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]
4. Interplay between probe design and test performance: overlap between genomic regions of interest, capture regions and high quality reference calls influence performance of WES-based assays.
Pranckeviciene E; Racacho L; Ghani M; Nfonsam L; Potter R; Sinclair-Bourque E; Mettler G; Smith A; Bronicki L; Huang L; Jarinova O
Hum Genet; 2021 Feb; 140(2):289-297. PubMed ID: 32627054
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Best practices for benchmarking germline small-variant calls in human genomes.
Krusche P; Trigg L; Boutros PC; Mason CE; De La Vega FM; Moore BL; Gonzalez-Porta M; Eberle MA; Tezak Z; Lababidi S; Truty R; Asimenos G; Funke B; Fleharty M; Chapman BA; Salit M; Zook JM;
Nat Biotechnol; 2019 May; 37(5):555-560. PubMed ID: 30858580
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Systematic comparison of germline variant calling pipelines cross multiple next-generation sequencers.
Chen J; Li X; Zhong H; Meng Y; Du H
Sci Rep; 2019 Jun; 9(1):9345. PubMed ID: 31249349
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. An open resource for accurately benchmarking small variant and reference calls.
Zook JM; McDaniel J; Olson ND; Wagner J; Parikh H; Heaton H; Irvine SA; Trigg L; Truty R; McLean CY; De La Vega FM; Xiao C; Sherry S; Salit M
Nat Biotechnol; 2019 May; 37(5):561-566. PubMed ID: 30936564
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. 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]
10. Performance assessment of variant calling pipelines using human whole exome sequencing and simulated data.
Kumaran M; Subramanian U; Devarajan B
BMC Bioinformatics; 2019 Jun; 20(1):342. PubMed ID: 31208315
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. OVarFlow: a resource optimized GATK 4 based Open source Variant calling workFlow.
Bathke J; Lühken G
BMC Bioinformatics; 2021 Aug; 22(1):402. PubMed ID: 34388963
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Set-theory based benchmarking of three different variant callers for targeted sequencing.
Molina-Mora JA; Solano-Vargas M
BMC Bioinformatics; 2021 Jan; 22(1):20. PubMed ID: 33413082
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. vcfdist: accurately benchmarking phased small variant calls in human genomes.
Dunn T; Narayanasamy S
Nat Commun; 2023 Dec; 14(1):8149. PubMed ID: 38071244
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
16. Extend the benchmarking indel set by manual review using the individual cell line sequencing data from the Sequencing Quality Control 2 (SEQC2) project.
Gong B; Li D; Zhang Y; Kusko R; Lababidi S; Cao Z; Chen M; Chen N; Chen Q; Chen Q; Dai J; Gan Q; Gao Y; Guo M; Hariani G; He Y; Hou W; Jiang H; Kushwaha G; Li JL; Li J; Li Y; Liu LC; Liu R; Liu S; Meriaux E; Mo M; Moore M; Moss TJ; Niu Q; Patel A; Ren L; Saremi NF; Shang E; Shang J; Song P; Sun S; Urban BJ; Wang D; Wang S; Wen Z; Xiong X; Yang J; Yin L; Zhang C; Zhang R; Bhandari A; Cai W; Eterovic AK; Megherbi DB; Shi T; Suo C; Yu Y; Zheng Y; Novoradovskaya N; Sears RL; Shi L; Jones W; Tong W; Xu J
Sci Rep; 2024 Mar; 14(1):7028. PubMed ID: 38528062
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Comparison of calling pipelines for whole genome sequencing: an empirical study demonstrating the importance of mapping and alignment.
Betschart RO; Thiéry A; Aguilera-Garcia D; Zoche M; Moch H; Twerenbold R; Zeller T; Blankenberg S; Ziegler A
Sci Rep; 2022 Dec; 12(1):21502. PubMed ID: 36513709
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. 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]
20. ICR142 Benchmarker: evaluating, optimising and benchmarking variant calling performance using the ICR142 NGS validation series.
Ruark E; Holt E; Renwick A; Münz M; Wakeling M; Ellard S; Mahamdallie S; Yost S; Rahman N
Wellcome Open Res; 2018; 3():108. PubMed ID: 30483600
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
