The DOI matches its Crossref record; 27 of the 27 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A survey of tools for variant analysis of next-generation genome sequencing data
Open accessAbstract
Recent advances in genome sequencing technologies provide unprecedented opportunities to characterize individual genomic landscapes and identify mutations relevant for diagnosis and therapy. Specifically, whole-exome sequencing using next-generation sequencing (NGS) technologies is gaining popularity in the human genetics community due to the moderate costs, manageable data amounts and straightforward interpretation of analysis results. While whole-exome and, in the near future, whole-genome sequencing are becoming commodities, data analysis still poses significant challenges and led to the development of a plethora of tools supporting specific parts of the analysis workflow or providing a complete solution. Here, we surveyed 205 tools for whole-genome/whole-exome sequencing data analysis supporting five distinct analytical steps: quality assessment, alignment, variant identification, variant annotation and visualization. We report an overview of the functionality, features and specific requirements of the individual tools. We then selected 32 programs for variant identification, variant annotation and visualization, which were subjected to hands-on evaluation using four data sets: one set of exome data from two patients with a rare disease for testing identification of germline mutations, two cancer data sets for testing variant callers for somatic mutations, copy number variations and structural variations, and one semi-synthetic data set for testing identification of copy number variations. Our comprehensive survey and evaluation of NGS tools provides a valuable guideline for human geneticists working on Mendelian disorders, complex diseases and cancers.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
The Sequence Alignment/Map format and SAMtools
Li, H., Handsaker, B., Wysoker, A., Fennell, T., Ruan, J., Homer, N., Marth, G., Abecasis, G., Durbin, R., & 1000 Genome Project Data Processing Subgroup (2009) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btp352 · Cited by 62,041
Fast and accurate short read alignment with Burrows-Wheeler transform
Li, H., & Durbin, R. (2009) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btp324 · Cited by 58,607
Ultrafast and memory-efficient alignment of short DNA sequences to the human genome.
Langmead, B., Trapnell, C., Pop, M., & Salzberg, S. L. (2009) · Genome Biology · doi:10.1186/gb-2009-10-3-r25 · Cited by 21,849
A method and server for predicting damaging missense mutations.
Adzhubei, I. A., Schmidt, S., Peshkin, L., Ramensky, V. E., Gerasimova, A., Bork, P., Kondrashov, A. S., & Sunyaev, S. R. (2010) · Nature Methods · doi:10.1038/nmeth0410-248 · Cited by 13,194
<tt>BLAT</tt> —The <tt>BLAST</tt> -Like Alignment Tool
Kent, W. J. (2002) · Genome Research · doi:10.1101/gr.229202 · Cited by 8,480
Sequencing technologies – the next generation
Metzker, M. L. (2010) · Nature Reviews Genetics · doi:10.1038/nrg2626 · Cited by 7,066
Kumar, P., Henikoff, S., & Ng, P. C. (2009) · Nature Protocols · doi:10.1038/nprot.2009.86 · Cited by 6,521
Evolutionarily conserved elements in vertebrate, insect, worm, and yeast genomes
Siepel, A., Bejerano, G., Pedersen, J. S., Hinrichs, A. S., Hou, M., Rosenbloom, K., Clawson, H., Spieth, J., Hillier, L. W., Richards, S., et al. (2005) · Genome Research · doi:10.1101/gr.3715005 · Cited by 3,971 · cited 1×
“SeattleSeq supplies four scores: GERP [127], Grantham [128], phastCons [129] and PolyPhen.”
MethodAccurate whole human genome sequencing using reversible terminator chemistry
Bentley, D. R., Balasubramanian, S., Swerdlow, H. P., Smith, G. P., Milton, J., Brown, C. G., Hall, K. P., Evers, D. J., Barnes, C. L., Bignell, H. R., et al. (2008) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature07517 · Cited by 3,684
MutationTaster evaluates disease-causing potential of sequence alterations
Schwarz, J. M., Rödelsperger, C., Schuelke, M., & Seelow, D. (2010) · Nature Methods · doi:10.1038/nmeth0810-575 · Cited by 2,975
Cited by
The Ensembl Variant Effect Predictor
McLaren, W., Gil, L., Hunt, S. E., Riat, H. S., Ritchie, G. R. S., Thormann, A., Flicek, P., & Cunningham, F. (2016) · Genome Biology · doi:10.1186/s13059-016-0974-4 · Cited by 8,099
HemI: A Toolkit for Illustrating Heatmaps
Deng, W., Wang, Y., Liu, Z., Cheng, H., & Xue, Y. (2014) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0111988 · Cited by 991
Historical perspective, development and applications of next-generation sequencing in plant virology
Barba, M., Czosnek, H., & Hadidi, A. (2014) · Viruses · doi:10.3390/v6010106 · Cited by 317
“, [94–97] and a book [98].”
Detection of Genomic Structural Variants from Next-Generation Sequencing Data
Tattini, L., D’Aurizio, R., & Magi, A. (2015) · Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology · doi:10.3389/fbioe.2015.00092 · Cited by 273
Cancer proteogenomics: current impact and future prospects
Mani, D. R., Krug, K., Zhang, B., Satpathy, S., Clauser, K. R., Ding, L., Ellis, M., Gillette, M. A., & Carr, S. A. (2022) · Nature Reviews Cancer · doi:10.1038/s41568-022-00446-5 · Cited by 229
Metadata
- Authors
- Pabinger, S., Dander, A., Fischer, M., Snajder, R., Sperk, M., Efremova, M., Krabichler, B., Speicher, M. R., Zschocke, J., & Trajanoski, Z.
- Venue
- Briefings in Bioinformatics
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2013-01-21
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 256-278
- ISSN
- 1467-5463 (ISSN-L)
- 1477-4054
- OpenAlex
- W2168440186
- Cited by
- 596
- References
- 27
- FWCI
- 54.63
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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: A survey of tools for variant analysis of next-generation genome sequencing data. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/bib/bbs086
- The paper
- Pabinger, S., Dander, A., Fischer, M., Snajder, R., Sperk, M., Efremova, M., Krabichler, B., Speicher, M. R., Zschocke, J., & Trajanoski, Z. (2014). A survey of tools for variant analysis of next-generation genome sequencing data. Briefings in Bioinformatics. https://doi.org/10.1093/bib/bbs086
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.
