Cited by 586RNA Interference and Gene DeliveryGene expression and cancer classificationComputational Drug Discovery Methods

Statistical methods for analysis of high-throughput RNA interference screens

Open access
Birmingham, Amanda, Selfors, Laura M, Forster, Thorsten, Wrobel, David, Kennedy, Caleb J, Shanks, Emma, Santoyo-Lopez, Javier, Dunican, Dara J +6 more·2009·Nature Methods

Abstract

RNA interference (RNAi) has become a powerful technique for reverse genetics and drug discovery, and in both of these areas large-scale high-throughput RNAi screens are commonly performed. The statistical techniques used to analyze these screens are frequently borrowed directly from small-molecule screening; however, small-molecule and RNAi data characteristics differ in meaningful ways. We examine the similarities and differences between RNAi and small-molecule screens, highlighting particular characteristics of RNAi screen data that must be addressed during analysis. Additionally, we provide guidance on selection of analysis techniques in the context of a sample workflow.

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/nmeth.1351

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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?

  • The robust Z-score is sensitive to shifts in median and commonly used as a normalization and strength of perturbation value in image-based phenotypic profiling, but it has not been used for estimating replicate dissimilarity nor compared to other distance metrics.

    “The robust Z-score is sensitive to shifts in median, and commonly used as a normalization and strength of perturbation value in the context of image-based phenotypic profiling, but it has not been used for estimating replicate dissimilarity, nor compared to other distance metrics12,30,37.”

    From A statistical framework for high-content phenotypic profiling using cellular feature distributions (2022) · cites this paper as [37]

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 1 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [23]Ainscow E Statistical techniques for handling high content screening data European Pharmaceutical Review 5 30 38 2007

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Birmingham, A., Selfors, L. M., Forster, T., Wrobel, D., Kennedy, C. J., Shanks, E., Santoyo-Lopez, J., Dunican, D. J., Long, A., Kelleher, D., Smith, Q., Beijersbergen, R. L., Ghazal, P., & Shamu, C. E.
Affiliations
  • Harvard University (US)
  • University of Edinburgh (GB)
  • University of Dundee (GB)
  • Trinity College Dublin (IE)
  • Thermo Fisher Scientific (United States) (US)
  • The Netherlands Cancer Institute (NL)
Corresponding author
Birmingham, Amanda
Venue
Nature Methods
Published
2009-07-30
Volume
6
Issue
8
Pages
569-575
ISSN
  • 1548-7091 (ISSN-L)
  • 1548-7105
OpenAlex
W2150091347
Cited by
586
References
37
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 30 · 2021: 29 · 2020: 44 · 2019: 35 · 2018: 39 · 2017: 46 · 2016: 48 · 2015: 50 · 2014: 57 · 2013: 45 · 2012: 38
FWCI
2.63
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Methods (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • ORCA Online Research @Cardiff (Cardiff University) (submittedVersion)
  • Edinburgh Research Explorer (University of Edinburgh) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • Wellcome Trust
  • European Commission
  • National Institutes of Health (AI057159)
  • Directorate for Biological Sciences
  • Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
  • Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (D019621, BB/D019621/1)
  • National Cancer Institute (P01CA078048, CA078048)
  • National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (AI 067751, U19AI067751, AI057159, U54AI057159)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › RNA Interference and Gene Delivery
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gene expression and cancer classification
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Computational Drug Discovery Methods
Keywords
RNAi screen, high-throughput screening, reverse genetics, drug discovery, analysis workflows
MeSH terms
Animals, Computer Simulation, Research Design, Models, Statistical, RNA Interference, RNA, Small Interfering, Small Molecule Libraries

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