Cited by 1,104Single-cell and spatial transcriptomicsGene expression and cancer classificationBioinformatics and Genomic Networks

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 11 of the 12 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

UCell: Robust and scalable single-cell gene signature scoring

Open access
Andreatta, Massimo, Carmona, Santiago J.·2021·Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

UCell is an R package for evaluating gene signatures in single-cell datasets. UCell signature scores, based on the Mann-Whitney U statistic, are robust to dataset size and heterogeneity, and their calculation demands less computing time and memory than other available methods, enabling the processing of large datasets in a few minutes even on machines with limited computing power. UCell can be applied to any single-cell data matrix, and includes functions to directly interact with Seurat objects. The UCell package and documentation are available on GitHub at https://github.com/carmonalab/UCell.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.csbj.2021.06.043

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Fig. 1 Evaluating T cell signatures using UCell. A) UMAP representation of T subsets from the single-cell dataset by Hao et al. [11]. B) UCell score distribution in UMAP space for five gene signatures (listed in Table 1) evaluated using UCell. C-D) Comparison of UCell score (C) and Seurat’s AddModuleScore (D) distributions for a two-gene CD8 T cell signature (CD8A, CD8B), evaluated on the complete T cell dataset (black outlines), or on the subset of CD8 T cells only (red outlines); UCell scores for CD8 T cell have the same distribution in the complete or subset dataset, while AddModuleScores are highly dependent on dataset composition. E-F) Running time (E) and peak memory (F) for UCell and AUCell (which produces similar results) on datasets of different sizes show that UCell is about three times faster and requires up to ten times less memory on large (>104) single-cell datasets. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
Fig. 1 Evaluating T cell signatures using UCell. A) UMAP representation of T subsets from the single-cell dataset by Hao et al. [11]. B) UCell score distribution in UMAP space for five gene signatures (listed in Table 1) evaluated using UCell. C-D) Comparison of UCell score (C) and Seurat’s AddModuleScore (D) distributions for a two-gene CD8 T cell signature (CD8A, CD8B), evaluated on the complete T cell dataset (black outlines), or on the subset of CD8 T cells only (red outlines); UCell scores for CD8 T cell have the same distribution in the complete or subset dataset, while AddModuleScores are highly dependent on dataset composition. E-F) Running time (E) and peak memory (F) for UCell and AUCell (which produces similar results) on datasets of different sizes show that UCell is about three times faster and requires up to ten times less memory on large (>104) single-cell datasets. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)CC BY · PubMed Central

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 12 references

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. 10.1016/j.cell.2021.04.048 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Andreatta, M., & Carmona, S. J.
Affiliations
SIB Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics (CH)
Corresponding author
Andreatta, Massimo
Venue
Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal
Published
2021-01
Volume
19
Pages
3796-3798
ISSN
2001-0370 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3174072032
Cited by
1,104
References
12
Citations by year
2026: 355 · 2025: 337 · 2024: 255 · 2023: 111 · 2022: 39 · 2021: 6
FWCI
36.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • SERVAL (Université de Lausanne) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • IRIS (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung (180010)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Single-cell and spatial transcriptomics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gene expression and cancer classification
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Bioinformatics and Genomic Networks
Keywords
single-cell RNA sequencing, R package, computational efficiency, scalability, biological heterogeneity

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review