Provenance — who produced it, who reused it
Linked to 1 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.
1 further paper cites this accession but reuse could not be confirmed.
Deep data QC
60/100 · DStandardized, field-standard QC computed by touching the data — every metric states how it was obtained · evidence: measured
SARS-CoV-2 amplicon sequencing; not recommended for reuse (grade D). Elevated adapter contamination (20.59%, scored 0/100) combined with lower Q30 content (87.9%, scored 90/100) jointly compromise amplicon targeting fidelity and base-level confidence. The dual quality concerns create downstream uncertainty in SNP/indel detection, warranting either intensive re-processing or dataset exclusion.
The D grade is a transparent weighted average. Each metric below scored from 0–100% against the published amplicon 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