ArticleMolecular therapy. Nucleic acids2020
Machine Learning of Single-Cell Transcriptome Highly Identifies mRNA Signature by Comparing F-Score Selection with DGE Analysis.
Article in Molecular therapy. Nucleic acids, 2020. 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.
- TENTACLES: a consensus machine learning tool for robust biomarker discovery in heterogeneous data.BioData mining · 2026Article
- Integrating WGCNA and machine learning algorithm to identify ACSM5 as a prognostic biomarker and therapeutic target for predicting immunotherapy efficacy in non-small cell lung cancer.Translational cancer research · 2026Article
- Identifying the DNA methylation preference of transcription factors using ProtBERT and SVM.PLoS computational biology · 2025Article
- NRTPredictor: identifying rice root cell state in single-cell RNA-seq via ensemble learning.Plant methods · 2023Article
- Identification of Two Flip-Over Genes in Grass Family as Potential Signature of C4 Photosynthesis Evolution.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- Pandemic vulnerability index of US cities: A hybrid knowledge-based and data-driven approach.Sustainable cities and society · 2023Article
- Small Non-Coding RNAs as New Biomarkers to Evaluate the Quality of the Embryo in the IVF Process.Biomolecules · 2022Article
- Research progress of reduced amino acid alphabets in protein analysis and prediction.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2022Review
- Single-Cell Multiomics Techniques: From Conception to Applications.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2022Review
- Application of artificial intelligence and machine learning for COVID-19 drug discovery and vaccine design.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2021Article
- Predicting Preference of Transcription Factors for Methylated DNA Using Sequence Information.Molecular therapy. Nucleic acids · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Human preimplantation development is a complex process involving dramatic changes in transcriptional architecture. For a better understanding of their time-spatial development, it is indispensable to identify key genes. Although the single-cell RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) techniques could provide detailed clustering signatures, the identification of decisive factors remains difficult. Additionally, it requires high experimental cost and a long experimental period. Thus, it is highly desired to develop computational methods for identifying effective genes of development signature. In this study, we first developed a predictor called EmPredictor to identify developmental stages of human preimplantation embryogenesis. First, we compared the F-score of feature selection algorithms with differential gene expression (DGE) analysis to find specific signatures of the development stage. In addition, by training the support vector machine (SVM), four types of signature subsets were comprehensively discussed. The prediction results showed that a feature subset with 1,881 genes from the F-score algorithm obtained the best predictive performance, which achieved the highest accuracy of 93.3% on the cross-validation set. Further function enrichment demonstrated that the gene set selected by the feature selection method was involved in more development-related pathways and cell fate determination biomarkers. This indicates that the F-score algorithm should be preferentially proposed for detecting key genes of multi-period data in mammalian early development.
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.