Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32206209›Full record

ReviewComputational and structural biotechnology journal2020

Challenges in detecting and quantifying intron retention from next generation sequencing data.

Lucile Broseus, William Ritchie

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Computational and structural biotechnology journal, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 49 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Implications of Antigen Selection on T Cell-Based Immunotherapy.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    Review
  20. Review
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Lucile BroseusIGH, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, University of Montpellier, Montpellier, France.
William RitchieIGH, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, University of Montpellier, Montpellier, France.
Université de Montpellier · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Intron retention (IR) occurs when an intron is transcribed into pre-mRNA and remains in the final mRNA. An increasing body of literature has demonstrated a major role for IR in numerous biological functions and in disease. Here we give an overview of the different computational approaches for detecting IR events from sequencing data. We show that these are based on different biological and computational assumptions that may lead to dramatically different results. We describe the various approaches for mitigating errors in detecting intron retention and for discovering IR signatures between different conditions.

Indexed as

AS, alternative splicingBioinformaticsGene expressionIntron retentionIR, Intron retentionmRNA splicingRNA-seq, RNA sequencingRNA sequencing

Identifiers

PMID32206209
PMCPMC7078297
OpenAlexW3007936495

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.