Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 403

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 48 of the 48 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Comprehensive assessment of array-based platforms and calling algorithms for detection of copy number variants

Open access
Pinto, Dalila, Darvishi, Katayoon, Shi, Xinghua, Rajan, Diana, Rigler, Diane, Fitzgerald, Tom, Lionel, Anath C, Thiruvahindrapuram, Bhooma, MacDonald, Jeffrey R, Mills, Ryan, Prasad, Aparna, Noonan, Kristin, Gribble, Susan, Prigmore, Elena, Donahoe, Patricia K, Smith, Richard S, Park, Ji Hyeon, Hurles, Matthew E, Carter, Nigel P, Lee, Charles, Scherer, Stephen W, Feuk, Lars·2011·Nature Biotechnology

Abstract

We have systematically compared copy number variant (CNV) detection on eleven microarrays to evaluate data quality and CNV calling, reproducibility, concordance across array platforms and laboratory sites, breakpoint accuracy and analysis tool variability. Different analytic tools applied to the same raw data typically yield CNV calls with <50% concordance. Moreover, reproducibility in replicate experiments is <70% for most platforms. Nevertheless, these findings should not preclude detection of large CNVs for clinical diagnostic purposes because large CNVs with poor reproducibility are found primarily in complex genomic regions and would typically be removed by standard clinical data curation. The striking differences between CNV calls from different platforms and analytic tools highlight the importance of careful assessment of experimental design in discovery and association studies and of strict data curation and filtering in diagnostics. The CNV resource presented here allows independent data evaluation and provides a means to benchmark new algorithms.

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 · 10.1038/nbt.1852

Cites

48 of 48 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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 48 references

Cited by

See all 403

Metadata

Authors
Pinto, D., Darvishi, K., Shi, X., Rajan, D., Rigler, D., Fitzgerald, T., Lionel, A. C., Thiruvahindrapuram, B., MacDonald, J. R., Mills, R., Prasad, A., Noonan, K., Gribble, S., Prigmore, E., Donahoe, P. K., Smith, R. S., Park, J. H., Hurles, M. E., Carter, N. P., Lee, C., Scherer, S. W., & Feuk, L.
Venue
Nature Biotechnology
Published
2011-05-08
Volume
29
Issue
6
Pages
512-520
ISSN
  • 0733-222X (ISSN-L)
  • 1087-0156
  • 1546-1696
OpenAlex
W2044823121
Cited by
403
References
48
FWCI
28.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Comprehensive assessment of array-based platforms and calling algorithms for detection of copy number variants. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1038/nbt.1852
The paper
Pinto, D., Darvishi, K., Shi, X., Rajan, D., Rigler, D., Fitzgerald, T., Lionel, A. C., Thiruvahindrapuram, B., MacDonald, J. R., Mills, R., Prasad, A., Noonan, K., Gribble, S., Prigmore, E., Donahoe, P. K., Smith, R. S., Park, J. H., Hurles, M. E., Carter, N. P., . . . Feuk, L. (2011). Comprehensive assessment of array-based platforms and calling algorithms for detection of copy number variants. Nature Biotechnology. https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.1852

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.