ArticleAdvances in bioinformatics2010
Testing the coding potential of conserved short genomic sequences.
Article in Advances in bioinformatics, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Proposed is a procedure to test whether a genomic sequence contains coding DNA, called a coding potential region. The procedure tests the coding potential of conserved short genomic sequence, in which the assumptions on the probability models of gene structures are relaxed. Thus, it is expected to provide additional candidate regions that contain coding DNAs to the current genomic database. The procedure was applied to the set of highly conserved human-mouse sequences in the genome database at the University of California at Santa Cruz. For sequences containing RefSeq coding exons, the procedure detected 91.3% regions having coding potential in this set, which covers 83% of the human RefSeq coding exons, at a 2.6% false positive rate. The procedure detected 12,688 novel short regions with coding potential at the false discovery rate <0.05; 65.7% of the novel regions are between annotated genes.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.