Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24185837›Full record

ArticleNature methods2013

Assessment of transcript reconstruction methods for RNA-seq.

Tamara Steijger, Josep F Abril, Pär G Engström, Felix Kokocinski, RGASP Consortium, Tim J Hubbard, Roderic Guigó, Jennifer Harrow, Paul Bertone

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nature methods, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 415 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
415citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

415 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. The Encyclopedia of DNA Elements.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. The circadian isoform landscape of mouse livers.NAR genomics and bioinformatics · 2026
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

355 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Tamara SteijgerEuropean Molecular Biology Laboratory, European Bioinformatics Institute, Cambridge, UK.
Josep F Abril *Departament de Genètica, Facultat de Biologia, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Pär G Engström *European Molecular Biology Laboratory, European Bioinformatics Institute, Cambridge, UK.
Felix Kokocinski *Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Cambridge, UK.
RGASP Consortium
Tim J HubbardWellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Cambridge, UK.
Roderic GuigóCenter for Genomic Regulation, Barcelona, Spain.
Jennifer HarrowWellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Cambridge, UK.
Paul BertoneEuropean Molecular Biology Laboratory, European Bioinformatics Institute, Cambridge, UK.

Funding

GENCODE Resource ProjectU41HG007234 · NHGRI · SANGER INSTITUTE · PI FLICEK, PAUL · 2013 to 2020
$20.3M
Comprehensive Characterization and Classification of the Human TranscriptomeU54HG004557 · NHGRI · COLD SPRING HARBOR LABORATORY · PI GINGERAS, THOMAS RAYMOND · 2007 to 2011
$14.5M
Integrated human genome annotation: generation of a reference gene setU54HG004555 · NHGRI · SANGER INSTITUTE · PI HUBBARD, TIMOTHY JOHN · 2007 to 2012
$11.2M
NHGRI NIH HHS U41 HG007234NHGRI NIH HHS U54 HG004555NHGRI NIH HHS U54HG004555NHGRI NIH HHS U54 HG004557NHGRI NIH HHS U54HG004557Wellcome Trust 062023Wellcome Trust 077198Wellcome Trust 095908Wellcome Trust WT098051
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We evaluated 25 protocol variants of 14 independent computational methods for exon identification, transcript reconstruction and expression-level quantification from RNA-seq data. Our results show that most algorithms are able to identify discrete transcript components with high success rates but that assembly of complete isoform structures poses a major challenge even when all constituent elements are identified. Expression-level estimates also varied widely across methods, even when based on similar transcript models. Consequently, the complexity of higher eukaryotic genomes imposes severe limitations on transcript recall and splice product discrimination that are likely to remain limiting factors for the analysis of current-generation RNA-seq data.

Indexed as

RNA SplicingAlgorithmsAnimalsCaenorhabditis elegansComputational BiologyDrosophila melanogasterExonsGene Expression ProfilingGenomeHumansIntronsRNA, MessengerRNA Splice SitesSequence Analysis, RNASoftwareRNA, MessengerRNA Splice Sites

Identifiers

PMID24185837
PMCPMC3851240

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.