ReviewInternational journal of molecular sciences2026
Transcriptomic Meta-Analysis as a Framework for Robust Cross-Study Biological Inference.
Review in International journal of molecular sciences, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A Meta-Analysis of the Converging Effects of Different Classes of Antipsychotics on the Frontal Cortex Transcriptome in Laboratory Rodents and Non-Human Primates.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The increasing availability of transcriptomic data has created new opportunities for integrating gene expression studies across biological systems and conditions. However, differences in experimental design, sequencing platforms, and sample composition introduce substantial heterogeneity, limiting direct comparability between studies. Transcriptomic meta-analysis provides a framework to address these challenges by identifying expression patterns that are reproducible across independent datasets. In this review, we outline the key methodological steps involved in transcriptomic meta-analysis, including dataset selection, preprocessing, normalization, batch-effect correction, and statistical integration. We discuss how these steps are influenced by the type of data being analyzed, from microarrays and bulk RNA sequencing to single-cell and spatial transcriptomics. Particular attention is given to the role of technical and biological heterogeneity, which must be explicitly considered to avoid misleading conclusions. Rather than treating heterogeneity solely as a source of noise, we argue that it defines the limits of reproducibility and interpretation in cross-study analyses. By focusing on consistent signals across diverse datasets, transcriptomic meta-analysis enables more robust biological inference and supports applications such as biomarker discovery and disease stratification.
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.