ArticleBioinformatics (Oxford, England)2021
Shark: fishing relevant reads in an RNA-Seq sample.
Article in Bioinformatics (Oxford, England), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Systematic Screening of Autosomal Dominant Tubulointerstitial Kidney Disease- MUC1 27dupC Pathogenic Variant through Exome Sequencing.Journal of the American Society of Nephrology : JASN · 2025Article
- Differential quantification of alternative splicing events on spliced pangenome graphs.PLoS computational biology · 2024Article
- Benchmarking machine learning robustness in Covid-19 genome sequence classification.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- L-RAPiT: A Cloud-Based Computing Pipeline for the Analysis of Long-Read RNA Sequencing Data.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Article
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
motivationRecent advances in high-throughput RNA-Seq technologies allow to produce massive datasets. When a study focuses only on a handful of genes, most reads are not relevant and degrade the performance of the tools used to analyze the data. Removing irrelevant reads from the input dataset leads to improved efficiency without compromising the results of the study.
resultsWe introduce a novel computational problem, called gene assignment and we propose an efficient alignment-free approach to solve it. Given an RNA-Seq sample and a panel of genes, a gene assignment consists in extracting from the sample, the reads that most probably were sequenced from those genes. The problem becomes more complicated when the sample exhibits evidence of novel alternative splicing events. We implemented our approach in a tool called Shark and assessed its effectiveness in speeding up differential splicing analysis pipelines. This evaluation shows that Shark is able to significantly improve the performance of RNA-Seq analysis tools without having any impact on the final results. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: The tool is distributed as a stand-alone module and the software is freely available at https://github.com/AlgoLab/shark. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.
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.