ArticleNAR genomics and bioinformatics2026
Evaluating the practical aspects and performance of commercial single-cell RNA sequencing technologies.
Article in NAR genomics and bioinformatics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- The challenges of single cell transcriptomics on difficult human tissue: the placenta.NAR genomics and bioinformatics · 2026Article
- Genomics in containment: BSL-4-compatible workflows enable high-resolution genomic and transcriptomic analyses of Risk Group 4 viruses.iScience · 2026Article
- Sequencing saturation does not uniquely determine molecular recovery in UMI transcriptomics.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- Massively Scalable Single-cell Multiomic Profiling of T Cell Repertoire with REFLEX.Research square · 2025Article
- REFLEX, a Novel Immune Profiling Assay, Combining TCR Repertoire and Multiome at Massively Scalable Single-cell Resolution to Catapult Exploration of T-cell Derived Immunity.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The rapid development of updated and new commercially available single-cell transcriptomics platforms provides users with a range of experimental options. Cost, sensitivity, throughput, flexibility, and ease of use all influence the selection of an optimal workflow. We performed a comprehensive comparison of single-cell transcriptomic approaches using multiple standardized PBMCs from different donors. We report on standard single-cell metrics, including cell recovery, sequencing efficiency, sensitivity, cell annotation, and differential gene expression for seven recently available kits that interrogate whole transcriptome mRNA, and two that incorporate TCR profiling. We also discuss workflow throughput, sample requirements, timing, cost, and labor as critical factors to consider. Apart from the platform-specific experimental constraints, our findings highlight how differences in cell recovery and sensitivity influence the ability to resolve niche cell subtypes such as CD4 + and CD8 + T-cells. Platforms with higher intra-sample variation had reduced sequencing efficiency, which cumulatively impacts reproducibility and overall experiment cost. By including TCR chain recovery for multiple donors, we provide the first comparison of T-cell specific performance in the only assays available for single cell TCR recovery. This work provides a basis by which users can balance performance and practical considerations when selecting a single-cell RNA sequencing platform.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.