ArticleBriefings in functional genomics2022
Deep learning tools are top performers in long non-coding RNA prediction.
Article in Briefings in functional genomics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- HyLnc: a hybrid deep learning and feature-based approach for long non-coding RNA prediction.RNA biology · 2026Article
- CNEwrap: a scalable toolkit with a novel algorithm for large-scale genome-wide accelerated conserved non-coding elements detection.Nucleic acids research · 2026Article
- Computational identification and characterization of noncoding RNA-encoded peptides: tools, databases, and in silico strategies.Amino acids · 2026Review
- Uncertainty-aware benchmarking reveals ambiguous transcripts in mRNA-lncRNA classification.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- LncPlankton: a comprehensive database of candidate lncRNAs from marine microbial eukaryotes.NAR genomics and bioinformatics · 2025Article
- A comprehensive analysis of Atlantic salmon gonad and pituitary transcriptomes identifies novel players in sexual maturation.BMC genomics · 2025Article
- Comparative Tissue Identification and Characterization of Long Non-Coding RNAs in the Globally Distributed Blue SharkLife (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Comparison and benchmark of deep learning methods for non-coding RNA classification.PLoS computational biology · 2024Article
- Pattern discovery of long non-coding RNAs associated with the herbal treatments in breast and prostate cancers.Quantitative biology (Beijing, China) · 2023Article
- Composition, physicochemical property and base periodicity for discriminating lncRNA and mRNA.Bioinformation · 2023Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
The increasing amount of transcriptomic data has brought to light vast numbers of potential novel RNA transcripts. Accurately distinguishing novel long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs) from protein-coding messenger RNAs (mRNAs) has challenged bioinformatic tool developers. Most recently, tools implementing deep learning architectures have been developed for this task, with the potential of discovering sequence features and their interactions still not surfaced in current knowledge. We compared the performance of deep learning tools with other predictive tools that are currently used in lncRNA coding potential prediction. A total of 15 tools representing the variety of available methods were investigated. In addition to known annotated transcripts, we also evaluated the use of the tools in actual studies with real-life data. The robustness and scalability of the tools' performance was tested with varying sized test sets and test sets with different proportions of lncRNAs and mRNAs. In addition, the ease-of-use for each tested tool was scored. Deep learning tools were top performers in most metrics and labelled transcripts similarly with each other in the real-life dataset. However, the proportion of lncRNAs and mRNAs in the test sets affected the performance of all tools. Computational resources were utilized differently between the top-ranking tools, thus the nature of the study may affect the decision of choosing one well-performing tool over another. Nonetheless, the results suggest favouring the novel deep learning tools over other tools currently in broad use.
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.