Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32138660›Full record

ArticleBMC genomics2020

InvBFM: finding genomic inversions from high-throughput sequence data based on feature mining.

Zhongjia Wu, Yufeng Wu, Jingyang Gao

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC genomics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
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

3 authors.

Zhongjia WuCollege of Information Science and Technology, Beijing University of Chemical Technology, Beijing, People's Republic of China.
Yufeng WuDepartment of Computer Science and Engineering, University of Connecticut, Storrs, Connecticut, USA.
Jingyang GaoCollege of Information Science and Technology, Beijing University of Chemical Technology, Beijing, People's Republic of China. gaojy@mail.buct.edu.cn.

Funding

Beijing Natural Science Foundation 5182018the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities PYBZ1834US National Science Foundation III-1526415
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGenomic inversion is one type of structural variations (SVs) and is known to play an important biological role. An established problem in sequence data analysis is calling inversions from high-throughput sequence data. It is more difficult to detect inversions because they are surrounded by duplication or other types of SVs in the inversion areas. Existing inversion detection tools are mainly based on three approaches: paired-end reads, split-mapped reads, and assembly. However, existing tools suffer from unsatisfying precision or sensitivity (eg: only 50~60% sensitivity) and it needs to be improved.

resultIn this paper, we present a new inversion calling method called InvBFM. InvBFM calls inversions based on feature mining. InvBFM first gathers the results of existing inversion detection tools as candidates for inversions. It then extracts features from the inversions. Finally, it calls the true inversions by a trained support vector machine (SVM) classifier.

conclusionsOur results on real sequence data from the 1000 Genomes Project show that by combining feature mining and a machine learning model, InvBFM outperforms existing tools. InvBFM is written in Python and Shell and is available for download at https://github.com/wzj1234/InvBFM.

Indexed as

Sequence InversionComputational BiologyData MiningHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingInternetSequence Analysis, DNASoftwareSupport Vector MachineGenomicsHigh-throughput sequencingInversionStructural variationSupport vector machine

Identifiers

PMID32138660
PMCPMC7057458

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.