ArticleComputational and structural biotechnology journal2024
RNA-protein interaction prediction without high-throughput data: An overview and benchmark of
Article in Computational and structural biotechnology journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- RNApedia: a database of structural protein-RNA interactions.Frontiers in bioinformatics · 2026Article
- The Circadian Transcription Factor CLOCK Modulates Oxidative Stress Resistance via the ACHL-Relish Axis in Drosophila.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026Article
- ProNA3D: Distance-Based Analysis of Nucleic Acid-Containing Interfaces.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2026Article
- StructRMDB: A database of RNA modification sites that affect RNA secondary structure.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
RNA-protein interactions (RPIs) are crucial for accurately operating various processes in and between organisms across kingdoms of life. Mutual detection of RPI partner molecules depends on distinct sequential, structural, or thermodynamic features, which can be determined via experimental and bioinformatic methods. Still, the underlying molecular mechanisms of many RPIs are poorly understood. It is further hypothesized that many RPIs are not even described yet. Computational RPI prediction is continuously challenged by the lack of data and detailed research of very specific examples. With the discovery of novel RPI complexes in all kingdoms of life, adaptations of existing RPI prediction methods are necessary. Continuously improving computational RPI prediction is key in advancing the understanding of RPIs in detail and supplementing experimental RPI determination. The growing amount of data covering more species and detailed mechanisms support the accuracy of prediction tools, which in turn support specific experimental research on RPIs. Here, we give an overview of RPI prediction tools that do not use high-throughput data as the user's input. We review the tools according to their input, usability, and output. We then apply the tools to known RPI examples across different kingdoms of life. Our comparison shows that the investigated prediction tools do not favor a certain species and equip the user with results varying in degree of information, from an overall RPI score to detailed interacting residues. Furthermore, we provide a guide tree to assist users which RPI prediction tool is appropriate for their available input data and desired output.
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.