Back to search

Article

Whose sample is it anyway? Widespread misannotation of samples in transcriptomics studies

2016-09-30

Abstract excerpt

Concern about the reproducibility and reliability of biomedical research has been rising. An understudied issue is the prevalence of sample mislabeling, one impact of which would be invalid comparisons. We studied this issue in a corpus of human transcriptomics studies by comparing the provided annotations of sex to the expression levels of sex-specific genes. We identified apparent mislabeled samples in 46% of th...

Topics

Open a Topic to create a Post that cites this publication.

Identifiers and source

Literature Corpus work
9bc99562-077d-5225-8eb3-412dd5506caf
DOI
10.12688/f1000research.9471.2
Open publication

Related research

Semantic proximity does not establish scientific evidence.

Click a neighbor to travelStep 1 · 12 closest
Interactive article relationship graphSelect a related publication card to move it into the centre and load its closest explainable connections. Solid lines are source-backed structured connections. Dashed lines are semantic discovery signals and are not scientific evidence.
Whose sample is it anyway? Widespread misannotation of samples in transcriptomics studiesDOI 10.12688/f1000research.9471.2
Select a neighboring publication to make it the new centre.