ReviewFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2015
Statistical approaches to detecting and analyzing tandem repeats in genomic sequences.
Review in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pan-SSR architecture in Acrossocheilus fasciatus links cross-assembly repeat conservation, repeat-unit count variation, and genomic context.Molecular genetics and genomics : MGG · 2026Article
- Mutation and selection processes regulating short tandem repeats give rise to genetic and phenotypic diversity across species.Journal of evolutionary biology · 2023Review
- Phenome-wide association study of loci harboring de novo tandem repeat mutations in UK Biobank exomes.Nature communications · 2022Article
- Methodologies for theGenes · 2022Review
- TRAL 2.0: Tandem Repeat Detection With Circular Profile Hidden Markov Models and Evolutionary Aligner.Frontiers in bioinformatics · 2021Article
- Article
- Accuracy of short tandem repeats genotyping tools in whole exome sequencing data.F1000Research · 2020Article
- Tandem repeats lead to sequence assembly errors and impose multi-level challenges for genome and protein databases.Nucleic acids research · 2019Review
- Tandem repeats mediating genetic plasticity in health and disease.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2018Review
- A polymorphic repeat in the IGF1 promoter influences the risk of endometrial cancer.Endocrine connections · 2016Article
- Tandem Repeats in Proteins: Prediction Algorithms and Biological Role.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2015Review
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Tandem repeats (TRs) are frequently observed in genomes across all domains of life. Evidence suggests that some TRs are crucial for proteins with fundamental biological functions and can be associated with virulence, resistance, and infectious/neurodegenerative diseases. Genome-scale systematic studies of TRs have the potential to unveil core mechanisms governing TR evolution and TR roles in shaping genomes. However, TR-related studies are often non-trivial due to heterogeneous and sometimes fast evolving TR regions. In this review, we discuss these intricacies and their consequences. We present our recent contributions to computational and statistical approaches for TR significance testing, sequence profile-based TR annotation, TR-aware sequence alignment, phylogenetic analyses of TR unit number and order, and TR benchmarks. Importantly, all these methods explicitly rely on the evolutionary definition of a tandem repeat as a sequence of adjacent repeat units stemming from a common ancestor. The discussed work has a focus on protein TRs, yet is generally applicable to nucleic acid TRs, sharing similar features.
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.