GSE84076
GEOProvenance — who produced it, who reused it
Linked to 2 papers in the literature. Roles are inferred factual signals (who deposited the data vs who reused it), with counts — never a judgement about any author.
2 further papers cite this accession but reuse could not be confirmed.
Deep data QC
76/100 · CStandardized, field-standard QC computed by touching the data — every metric states how it was obtained · evidence: measured
Expression profiling by RNA-seq from human. Grade C (76/100) is severely compromised by adapter content at 32.42% (scored 0/100), indicating severe under-trimming, and duplication at 49.13% (scored 57/100). High residual adapters will degrade alignment quality; reuse is not recommended without aggressive re-processing.
The C grade is a transparent weighted average. Each metric below scored from 0–100% against the published bulk-RNA-seq thresholds, weighted by its importance; nothing is hidden or subjective.
measured = computed from the data · extrapolated/reported = derived or from the repository · dq-1.0
Scientific quality
Based on hands-on reproduction of the papers that use this dataset. A reproducible paper that stands on this data is positive evidence; a flagged one is a prompt to look closer — never a verdict on the dataset itself without the evidence.