ArticleNature communications2024
SurVIndel2: improving copy number variant calling from next-generation sequencing using hidden split reads.
Article in Nature communications, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Characterization of rare genomic structural variants across 2,981 genomes reveals significant involvements in recessive conditions.Science China. Life sciences · 2026Article
- SSLCNV: A Semi-supervised Learning Framework for Accurate Copy Number Variation Detection.Interdisciplinary sciences, computational life sciences · 2025Article
- LYCEUM: learning to call copy number variants on low-coverage ancient genomes.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 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
Deletions and tandem duplications (commonly called CNVs) represent the majority of structural variations in a human genome. They can be identified using short reads, but because they frequently occur in repetitive regions, existing methods fail to detect most of them. This is because CNVs in repetitive regions often do not produce the evidence needed by existing short reads-based callers (split reads, discordant pairs or read depth change). Here, we introduce a new CNV short reads-based caller named SurVIndel2. SurVindel2 builds on statistical techniques we previously developed, but also employs a novel type of evidence, hidden split reads, that can uncover many CNVs missed by existing algorithms. We use public benchmarks to show that SurVIndel2 outperforms other popular callers, both on human and non-human datasets. Then, we demonstrate the practical utility of the method by generating a catalogue of CNVs for the 1000 Genomes Project that contains hundreds of thousands of CNVs missing from the most recent public catalogue. We also show that SurVIndel2 is able to complement small indels predicted by Google DeepVariant, and the two software used in tandem produce a remarkably complete catalogue of variants in an individual. Finally, we characterise how the limitations of current sequencing technologies contribute significantly to the missing CNVs.
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.