Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30097058›Full record

ReviewGenome biology2018

Single-cell RNAseq for the study of isoforms-how is that possible?

Ángeles Arzalluz-Luque, Ana Conesa

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Genome biology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 88 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
88citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

88 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Sequencing technologies to measure translation in single cells.Nature reviews. Molecular cell biology · 2025
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

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

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Ángeles Arzalluz-LuqueGenomics of Gene Expression Laboratory, Centro de Investigación Principe Felipe (CIPF), 46012, Valencia, Spain.
Ana ConesaGenomics of Gene Expression Laboratory, Centro de Investigación Principe Felipe (CIPF), 46012, Valencia, Spain. aconesa@ufl.edu.ORCID 0000-0001-9597-311X

Funding

H2020 Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions PIRSES-GA-2013-612583Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad BES-2016-076994Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad BIO2015-71658-R
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Single-cell RNAseq and alternative splicing studies have recently become two of the most prominent applications of RNAseq. However, the combination of both is still challenging, and few research efforts have been dedicated to the intersection between them. Cell-level insight on isoform expression is required to fully understand the biology of alternative splicing, but it is still an open question to what extent isoform expression analysis at the single-cell level is actually feasible. Here, we establish a set of four conditions that are required for a successful single-cell-level isoform study and evaluate how these conditions are met by these technologies in published research.

Indexed as

ArtifactsCell CountComputational BiologyComputer SimulationProtein IsoformsRNA, MessengerSequence Analysis, RNASingle-Cell AnalysisProtein IsoformsRNA, Messenger

Identifiers

PMID30097058
PMCPMC6085759

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.