↓ Skip to main content

Single-Cell RNA-Sequencing: Assessment of Differential Expression Analysis Methods

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Genetics, May 2017
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 (90th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
26 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
99 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
289 Mendeley
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
Single-Cell RNA-Sequencing: Assessment of Differential Expression Analysis Methods
Published in
Frontiers in Genetics, May 2017
DOI 10.3389/fgene.2017.00062
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alessandra Dal Molin, Giacomo Baruzzo, Barbara Di Camillo

Abstract

The sequencing of the transcriptomes of single-cells, or single-cell RNA-sequencing, has now become the dominant technology for the identification of novel cell types and for the study of stochastic gene expression. In recent years, various tools for analyzing single-cell RNA-sequencing data have been proposed, many of them with the purpose of performing differentially expression analysis. In this work, we compare four different tools for single-cell RNA-sequencing differential expression, together with two popular methods originally developed for the analysis of bulk RNA-sequencing data, but largely applied to single-cell data. We discuss results obtained on two real and one synthetic dataset, along with considerations about the perspectives of single-cell differential expression analysis. In particular, we explore the methods performance in four different scenarios, mimicking different unimodal or bimodal distributions of the data, as characteristic of single-cell transcriptomics. We observed marked differences between the selected methods in terms of precision and recall, the number of detected differentially expressed genes and the overall performance. Globally, the results obtained in our study suggest that is difficult to identify a best performing tool and that efforts are needed to improve the methodologies for single-cell RNA-sequencing data analysis and gain better accuracy of results.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 26 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 289 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 <1%
Unknown 287 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 67 23%
Researcher 57 20%
Student > Master 35 12%
Student > Bachelor 20 7%
Other 15 5%
Other 48 17%
Unknown 47 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 77 27%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 66 23%
Computer Science 24 8%
Neuroscience 19 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 17 6%
Other 36 12%
Unknown 50 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 23. 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 14 April 2021.
All research outputs
#1,744,204
of 26,374,136 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Genetics
#351
of 13,900 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,763
of 331,986 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Genetics
#6
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,374,136 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,900 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 331,986 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 56 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.