Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33522408›Full record

ArticleRNA biology2021

Exon-level estimates improve the detection of differentially expressed genes in RNA-seq studies.

Arfa Mehmood, Asta Laiho, Laura L Elo

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in RNA biology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 49% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Arfa MehmoodTurku Bioscience Centre, University of Turku and Åbo Akademi University, Turku, Finland.
Asta LaihoTurku Bioscience Centre, University of Turku and Åbo Akademi University, Turku, Finland.ORCID 0000-0001-6217-6659
Laura L EloTurku Bioscience Centre, University of Turku and Åbo Akademi University, Turku, Finland.
Åbo Akademi University · FI

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Detection of differentially expressed genes (DEGs) between different biological conditions is a key data analysis step of most RNA-sequencing studies. Conventionally, computational tools have used gene-level read counts as input to test for differential gene expression between sample condition groups. Recently, it has been suggested that statistical testing could be performed with increased power at a lower feature level prior to aggregating the results to the gene level. In this study, we systematically compared the performance of calling the DEGs when using read count data at different levels (gene, transcript, and exon) as input, in the context of two publicly available data sets. Additionally, we tested two different methods for aggregating the lower feature-level p-values to gene-level: Lancaster and empirical Brown's method. Our results show that detection of DEGs is improved compared to the conventional gene-level approach regardless of the lower feature-level used for statistical testing. The overall best balance between accuracy and false discovery rate was obtained using the exon-level approach with empirical Brown's aggregation method, which we provide as a freely available Bioconductor package EBSEA (https://bioconductor.org/packages/release/bioc/html/EBSEA.html).

Indexed as

ExonsGene Expression Regulation, NeoplasticSoftwareBiomarkers, TumorExome SequencingHumansMaleProstatic NeoplasmsRNA-SeqTranscriptomeBiomarkers, Tumordifferentially expressed genesexon-level read countsgene-level read countsRNA-seqtranscript compatibility countstranscript-level read counts

Identifiers

PMID33522408
PMCPMC8582999
OpenAlexW3127925229

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.