ArticleMicroorganisms2022
Towards Efficient and Accurate SARS-CoV-2 Genome Sequence Typing Based on Supervised Learning Approaches.
Article in Microorganisms, 2022. 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.
- Article
- Machine learning assessment of zoonotic potential in avian influenza viruses using PB2 segment.BMC genomics · 2025Article
- HCoVDB: a comprehensive database encompassing viral genomes, drug targets, and therapeutics of human coronaviruses.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2025Article
- Integrating ensemble machine learning and multi-omics approaches to identify Dp44mT as a novel anti-Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
- Enhanced predictability and interpretability of COVID-19 severity based on SARS-CoV-2 genomic diversity: a comprehensive study encompassing four years of data.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Epidemiological and clinical features of COVID-19 inpatients in Changsha, China: A retrospective study from 2020 to 2022.Heliyon · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Despite the active development of SARS-CoV-2 surveillance methods (e.g., Nextstrain, GISAID, Pangolin), the global emergence of various SARS-CoV-2 viral lineages that potentially cause antiviral and vaccine failure has driven the need for accurate and efficient SARS-CoV-2 genome sequence classifiers. This study presents an optimized method that accurately identifies the viral lineages of SARS-CoV-2 genome sequences using existing schemes. For Nextstrain and GISAID clades, a template matching-based method is proposed to quantify the differences between viral clades and to play an important role in classification evaluation. Furthermore, to improve the typing accuracy of SARS-CoV-2 genome sequences, an ensemble model that integrates a combination of machine learning-based methods (such as Random Forest and Catboost) with optimized weights is proposed for Nextstrain, Pangolin, and GISAID clades. Cross-validation is applied to optimize the parameters of the machine learning-based method and the weight settings of the ensemble model. To improve the efficiency of the model, in addition to the one-hot encoding method, we have proposed a nucleotide site mutation-based data structure that requires less computational resources and performs better in SARS-CoV-2 genome sequence typing. Based on an accumulated database of >1 million SARS-CoV-2 genome sequences, performance evaluations show that the proposed system has a typing accuracy of 99.879%, 97.732%, and 96.291% for Nextstrain, Pangolin, and GISAID clades, respectively. A single prediction only takes an average of <20 ms on a portable laptop. Overall, this study provides an efficient and accurate SARS-CoV-2 genome sequence typing system that benefits current and future surveillance of SARS-CoV-2 variants.
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.