ArticleFrontiers in genetics2020
DINTD: Detection and Inference of Tandem Duplications From Short Sequencing Reads.
Article in Frontiers in genetics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- The emergence of eukaryotes as an evolutionary algorithmic phase transition.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Article
- A copy number variation detection method based on OCSVM algorithm using multi strategies integration.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Pindel-TD: A Tandem Duplication Detector Based on A Pattern Growth Approach.Genomics, proteomics & bioinformatics · 2024Article
- Gene family expansions in Antarctic winged midge as a strategy for adaptation to cold environments.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Review
- CNV-PCC: An efficient method for detecting copy number variations from next-generation sequencing data.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2022Article
- CNV-MEANN: A Neural Network and Mind Evolutionary Algorithm-Based Detection of Copy Number Variations From Next-Generation Sequencing Data.Frontiers in genetics · 2021Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Tandem duplication (TD) is an important type of structural variation (SV) in the human genome and has biological significance for human cancer evolution and tumor genesis. Accurate and reliable detection of TDs plays an important role in advancing early detection, diagnosis, and treatment of disease. The advent of next-generation sequencing technologies has made it possible for the study of TDs. However, detection is still challenging due to the uneven distribution of reads and the uncertain amplitude of TD regions. In this paper, we present a new method, DINTD (Detection and INference of Tandem Duplications), to detect and infer TDs using short sequencing reads. The major principle of the proposed method is that it first extracts read depth and mapping quality signals, then uses the DBSCAN (Density-Based Spatial Clustering of Applications with Noise) algorithm to find the possible TD regions. The total variation penalized least squares model is fitted with read depth and mapping quality signals to denoise signals. A 2D binary search tree is used to search the neighbor points effectively. To further identify the exact breakpoints of the TD regions, split-read signals are integrated into DINTD. The experimental results of DINTD on simulated data sets showed that DINTD can outperform other methods for sensitivity, precision, F1-score, and boundary bias. DINTD is further validated on real samples, and the experiment results indicate that it is consistent with other methods. This study indicates that DINTD can be used as an effective tool for detecting TDs.
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.