ReviewCold Spring Harbor protocols2015
Identification and computational analysis of gene regulatory elements.
Review in Cold Spring Harbor protocols, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Characterization of archaeal promoters using explainable and web-based CNN model.BMC genomics · 2025Article
- Computational approaches for identifying neuropeptides: A comprehensive review.Molecular therapy. Nucleic acids · 2025Review
- Atlas of regulated target genes of transcription factors (ART-TF) in human ES cells.BMC bioinformatics · 2022Article
- Principles and methods of in-silico prioritization of non-coding regulatory variants.Human genetics · 2018Review
- Expanded Insights Into Mechanisms of Gene Expression and Disease Related Disruptions.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2018Review
- Article
- Is blockchain the breakthrough we are looking for to facilitate genomic data sharing? The European Union perspective.Digital healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Over the last two decades, advances in experimental and computational technologies have greatly facilitated genomic research. Next-generation sequencing technologies have made de novo sequencing of large genomes affordable, and powerful computational approaches have enabled accurate annotations of genomic DNA sequences. Charting functional regions in genomes must account for not only the coding sequences, but also noncoding RNAs, repetitive elements, chromatin states, epigenetic modifications, and gene regulatory elements. A mix of comparative genomics, high-throughput biological experiments, and machine learning approaches has played a major role in this truly global effort. Here we describe some of these approaches and provide an account of our current understanding of the complex landscape of the human genome. We also present overviews of different publicly available, large-scale experimental data sets and computational tools, which we hope will prove beneficial for researchers working with large and complex genomes.
Indexed as
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.