ArticleRNA biology2021
Exon-level estimates improve the detection of differentially expressed genes in RNA-seq studies.
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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Dual promoter architecture of NFE2L2 underlies isoform-specific translational control of NRF2.Redox biology · 2026Article
- Response splicing quantitative trait loci in primary human chondrocytes identify putative osteoarthritis risk genes.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Response splicing QTLs in primary human chondrocytes identifies putative osteoarthritis risk genes.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
- Article
- Transcriptomics for Clinical and Experimental Biology Research: Hang on a Seq.Advanced genetics (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.