ArticleGenes2020
Annotation of Human Exome Gene Variants with Consensus Pathogenicity.
Article in Genes, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Benchmarking of variant pathogenicity prediction methods using a population genetics approach.Bioinformatics advances · 2025Article
- Functional analysis of ESRP1/2 gene variants and CTNND1 isoforms in orofacial cleft pathogenesis.Communications biology · 2024Article
- Functional analysis ofbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
- Germline variants associated with breast cancer in Khakass women of North Asia.Molecular biology reports · 2023Article
- Article
- Clinical significance of genetic variation in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: comparison of computational tools to prioritize missense variants.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A novel approach is developed to address the challenge of annotating with phenotypic effects those exome variants for which relevant empirical data are lacking or minimal. The predictive annotation method is implemented as a stacked ensemble of supervised base-learners, including distributed random forest and gradient boosting machines. Ensemble models were trained and cross-validated on evidence-based categorical variant effect annotations from the ClinVar database, and were applied to 84 million non-synonymous single nucleotide variants (SNVs). The consensus model combined 39 functional mutation impacts, cross-species conservation score, and gene indispensability score. The indispensability score, accounting for differences in variant pathogenicities including in essential and mutation-tolerant genes, considerably improved the predictions. The consensus combination is consistent with as many input scores as possible while minimizing false predictions. The input scores are ranked based on their ability to predict effects. The score rankings and categorical phenotypic variant effect predictions are aimed for direct use in clinical and biological applications to prioritize human exome variants and mutations.
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.