ArticleScientific reports2024
A natural language processing system for the efficient extraction of cell markers.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. 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.
- Integrative evidence-knowledge marker selection enhances LLM-based cell type annotation in single-cell RNA-seq analysis.BioData mining · 2026Article
- Natural Language Processing Methods Automate Molecular Marker Extraction From Glioma Pathology Reports.Neurosurgery · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence-Driven Nanoarchitectonics for Smart Targeted Drug Delivery.Advanced materials (Deerfield Beach, Fla.) · 2025Review
- Advancing automated cell type annotation with large language models and single-cell isoform sequencing.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2025Review
- Application of machine learning based genome sequence analysis in pathogen identification.Frontiers in microbiology · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) has emerged as a pivotal tool for exploring cellular landscapes across diverse species and tissues. Precise annotation of cell types is essential for understanding these landscapes, relying heavily on empirical knowledge and curated cell marker databases. In this study, we introduce MarkerGeneBERT, a natural language processing (NLP) system designed to extract critical information from the literature regarding species, tissues, cell types, and cell marker genes in the context of single-cell sequencing studies. Leveraging MarkerGeneBERT, we systematically parsed full-text articles from 3702 single-cell sequencing-related studies, yielding a comprehensive collection of 7901 cell markers representing 1606 cell types across 425 human tissues/subtissues, and 8223 cell markers representing 1674 cell types across 482 mouse tissues/subtissues. Comparative analysis against manually curated databases demonstrated that our approach achieved 76% completeness and 75% accuracy, while also unveiling 89 cell types and 183 marker genes absent from existing databases. Furthermore, we successfully applied the compiled brain tissue marker gene list from MarkerGeneBERT to annotate scRNA-seq data, yielding results consistent with original studies. Conclusions: Our findings underscore the efficacy of NLP-based methods in expediting and augmenting the annotation and interpretation of scRNA-seq data, providing a systematic demonstration of the transformative potential of this approach. The 27323 manual reviewed sentences for training MarkerGeneBERT and the source code are hosted at https://github.com/chengpeng1116/MarkerGeneBERT .
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.