ArticleBiology direct2019
A high-performance approach for predicting donor splice sites based on short window size and imbalanced large samples.
Article in Biology direct, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- iSuc-ChiDT: a computational method for identifying succinylation sites using statistical difference table encoding and the chi-square decision table classifier.BioData mining · 2022Article
- Spliceator: multi-species splice site prediction using convolutional neural networks.BMC bioinformatics · 2021Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSplice sites prediction has been a long-standing problem in bioinformatics. Although many computational approaches developed for splice site prediction have achieved satisfactory accuracy, further improvement in predictive accuracy is significant, for it is contributing to predict gene structure more accurately. Determining a proper window size before prediction is necessary. Overly long window size may introduce some irrelevant features, which would reduce predictive accuracy, while the use of short window size with maximum information may performs better in terms of predictive accuracy and time cost. Furthermore, the number of false splice sites following the GT-AG rule far exceeds that of true splice sites, accurate and rapid prediction of splice sites using imbalanced large samples has always been a challenge. Therefore, based on the short window size and imbalanced large samples, we developed a new computational method named chi-square decision table (χ
resultsUsing a short window size of 11 bp, χ
conclusionsBased on short window size and imbalanced large samples, the proposed method not only achieves higher predictive accuracy than some existing methods, but also has high computational speed and good robustness against nucleotide insertions and deletions. REVIEWERS: This article was reviewed by Ryan McGinty, Ph.D. and Dirk Walther.
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.