Cited by 155Single-cell and spatial transcriptomicsGene expression and cancer classificationGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies

powsimR: power analysis for bulk and single cell RNA-seq experiments

Open access
Vieth, Beate, Ziegenhain, Christoph, Parekh, Swati, Enard, Wolfgang, Hellmann, Ines·2017·Bioinformatics

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Summary: Power analysis is essential to optimize the design of RNA-seq experiments and to assess and compare the power to detect differentially expressed genes in RNA-seq data. PowsimR is a flexible tool to simulate and evaluate differential expression from bulk and especially single-cell RNA-seq data making it suitable for a priori and posterior power analyses. Availability and implementation: The R package and associated tutorial are freely available at https://github.com/bvieth/powsimR. Supplementary information: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

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 · 10.1093/bioinformatics/btx435

Cites

34 of 34 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?

  • scRNA-seq data are not in fact log-normally distributed.

    “While scRNA‐seq data are not in fact log‐normally distributed (Vieth et al, 2017), these three effects make the log transformation a crude, but useful tool.”

    From Current best practices in single-cell RNA-seq analysis: a tutorial (2019) · cites this paper as Vieth et al, 2017

  • Vieth et al showed that read and count data are best fit by different models.

    “For example, Vieth et al (2017) showed that read and count data are best fit by different models.”

    From Current best practices in single-cell RNA-seq analysis: a tutorial (2019) · cites this paper as Vieth et al, 2017

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Vieth, B., Ziegenhain, C., Parekh, S., Enard, W., & Hellmann, I.
Affiliations
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (DE)
Corresponding author
  • Vieth, Beate
  • Hellmann, Ines
Venue
Bioinformatics
Published
2017-07-11
Volume
33
Issue
21
Pages
3486-3488
ISSN
  • 1367-4803 (ISSN-L)
  • 1367-4811
OpenAlex
W2949086748
Cited by
155
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 26 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 4
FWCI
6.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Bioinformatics (publishedVersion)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
  • DFG (SFB1243)
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 › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Keywords
power analysis, single-cell RNA sequencing, bulk RNA-seq, differential gene expression, sample size simulation, a priori power analysis, R package
MeSH terms
Software, Sequence Analysis, RNA, Gene Expression Profiling, Single-Cell Analysis

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