ArticleGenes2019
A Sequence-Based Novel Approach for Quality Evaluation of Third-Generation Sequencing Reads.
Article in Genes, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The advent of third-generation sequencing (TGS) technologies, such as the Pacific Biosciences (PacBio) and Oxford Nanopore machines, provides new possibilities for contig assembly, scaffolding, and high-performance computing in bioinformatics due to its long reads. However, the high error rate and poor quality of TGS reads provide new challenges for accurate genome assembly and long-read alignment. Efficient processing methods are in need to prioritize high-quality reads for improving the results of error correction and assembly. In this study, we proposed a novel Read Quality Evaluation and Selection Tool (REQUEST) for evaluating the quality of third-generation long reads. REQUEST generates training data of high-quality and low-quality reads which are characterized by their nucleotide combinations. A linear regression model was built to score the quality of reads. The method was tested on three datasets of different species. The results showed that the top-scored reads prioritized by REQUEST achieved higher alignment accuracies. The contig assembly results based on the top-scored reads also outperformed conventional approaches that use all reads. REQUEST is able to distinguish high-quality reads from low-quality ones without using reference genomes, making it a promising alternative sequence-quality evaluation method to alignment-based algorithms.
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.