↓ Skip to main content

A machine learning model to determine the accuracy of variant calls in capture-based next generation sequencing

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Genomics, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
21 X users
patent
3 patents

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
75 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A machine learning model to determine the accuracy of variant calls in capture-based next generation sequencing
Published in
BMC Genomics, April 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12864-018-4659-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jeroen van den Akker, Gilad Mishne, Anjali D. Zimmer, Alicia Y. Zhou

Abstract

Next generation sequencing (NGS) has become a common technology for clinical genetic tests. The quality of NGS calls varies widely and is influenced by features like reference sequence characteristics, read depth, and mapping accuracy. With recent advances in NGS technology and software tools, the majority of variants called using NGS alone are in fact accurate and reliable. However, a small subset of difficult-to-call variants that still do require orthogonal confirmation exist. For this reason, many clinical laboratories confirm NGS results using orthogonal technologies such as Sanger sequencing. Here, we report the development of a deterministic machine-learning-based model to differentiate between these two types of variant calls: those that do not require confirmation using an orthogonal technology (high confidence), and those that require additional quality testing (low confidence). This approach allows reliable NGS-based calling in a clinical setting by identifying the few important variant calls that require orthogonal confirmation. We developed and tested the model using a set of 7179 variants identified by a targeted NGS panel and re-tested by Sanger sequencing. The model incorporated several signals of sequence characteristics and call quality to determine if a variant was identified at high or low confidence. The model was tuned to eliminate false positives, defined as variants that were called by NGS but not confirmed by Sanger sequencing. The model achieved very high accuracy: 99.4% (95% confidence interval: +/- 0.03%). It categorized 92.2% (6622/7179) of the variants as high confidence, and 100% of these were confirmed to be present by Sanger sequencing. Among the variants that were categorized as low confidence, defined as NGS calls of low quality that are likely to be artifacts, 92.1% (513/557) were found to be not present by Sanger sequencing. This work shows that NGS data contains sufficient characteristics for a machine-learning-based model to differentiate low from high confidence variants. Additionally, it reveals the importance of incorporating site-specific features as well as variant call features in such a model.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 21 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 75 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 15 20%
Student > Master 10 13%
Other 6 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 8%
Student > Bachelor 4 5%
Other 9 12%
Unknown 25 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 17 23%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 7%
Computer Science 4 5%
Engineering 3 4%
Other 7 9%
Unknown 27 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 November 2023.
All research outputs
#1,916,607
of 24,580,204 outputs
Outputs from BMC Genomics
#441
of 11,012 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#40,682
of 331,752 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Genomics
#9
of 235 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,580,204 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,012 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 331,752 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 235 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.