387 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33910496)
1. 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]
2. Evaluation of an optimized germline exomes pipeline using BWA-MEM2 and Dragen-GATK tools.
Alganmi N; Abusamra H
PLoS One; 2023; 18(8):e0288371. PubMed ID: 37535628
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
4. Evaluation of variant calling tools for large plant genome re-sequencing.
Yao Z; You FM; N'Diaye A; Knox RE; McCartney C; Hiebert CW; Pozniak C; Xu W
BMC Bioinformatics; 2020 Aug; 21(1):360. PubMed ID: 32807073
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. 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]
6. MutAid: Sanger and NGS Based Integrated Pipeline for Mutation Identification, Validation and Annotation in Human Molecular Genetics.
Pandey RV; Pabinger S; Kriegner A; Weinhäusel A
PLoS One; 2016; 11(2):e0147697. PubMed ID: 26840129
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Evaluating the Calling Performance of a Rare Disease NGS Panel for Single Nucleotide and Copy Number Variants.
Cacheiro P; Ordóñez-Ugalde A; Quintáns B; Piñeiro-Hermida S; Amigo J; García-Murias M; Pascual-Pascual SI; Grandas F; Arpa J; Carracedo A; Sobrido MJ
Mol Diagn Ther; 2017 Jun; 21(3):303-313. PubMed ID: 28290094
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Calling known variants and identifying new variants while rapidly aligning sequence data.
VanRaden PM; Bickhart DM; O'Connell JR
J Dairy Sci; 2019 Apr; 102(4):3216-3229. PubMed ID: 30772032
[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. 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]
11. 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]
12. 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]
13. SNVSniffer: an integrated caller for germline and somatic single-nucleotide and indel mutations.
Liu Y; Loewer M; Aluru S; Schmidt B
BMC Syst Biol; 2016 Aug; 10 Suppl 2(Suppl 2):47. PubMed ID: 27489955
[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. 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]
16. 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]
17. Comparison of Read Mapping and Variant Calling Tools for the Analysis of Plant NGS Data.
Schilbert HM; Rempel A; Pucker B
Plants (Basel); 2020 Apr; 9(4):. PubMed ID: 32252268
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Short-read aligner performance in germline variant identification.
Wilton R; Szalay AS
Bioinformatics; 2023 Aug; 39(8):. PubMed ID: 37527006
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. 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]
20. 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]
[Next] [New Search]
