ArticleBriefings in bioinformatics2025
A novel splicing graph allows a direct comparison between exon-based and splice junction-based approaches to alternative splicing detection.
Article in Briefings in bioinformatics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Isoform Remodeling and Promoter Switching Identify Altered Transcriptional Regulation in Alzheimer's Disease Frontal Cortex.Research square · 2026Article
- Benchmarking RNA-seq with the Quartet and MAQC reference materials to establish best practices for accurate alternative splicing analysis.Nature communications · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
There are primarily two computational approaches to alternative splicing (AS) detection using short reads: splice junction-based and exon-based approaches. Despite their shared goal of addressing the same biological problem, these approaches have not been reconciled before. We devised a novel graph structure and algorithm aimed at mapping between the exonic parts and splicing events detected by the two different methods. Through simulations, we demonstrated disparities in sensitivity and specificity between splice junction-based and exon-based methods. When applied to empirical data, there were large discrepancies in the results, suggesting that the methods are complementary. With the discrepancies localized to individual events and exonic parts, we were able to gain insights into the strengths and weaknesses inherent in each approach. Finally, we integrated the results to generate a comprehensive list of both common and unique AS events detected by both methodologies.
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.