ArticleRNA (New York, N.Y.)2025
Evaluation of novel computational methods to identify RNA-binding protein footprints from structural data.
Article in RNA (New York, N.Y.), 2025. 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.
- How Binding Affinity and Binding Specificity Map to Sequence Space.Journal of molecular evolution · 2026Article
- Deep learning for RNA secondary structure determination: gauging generalizability and broadening the scope of traditional methods.RNA (New York, N.Y.) · 2026Review
- Deep Learning for RNA Secondary Structure Determination: Gauging Generalizability and Broadening the Scope of Traditional Methods.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 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
22 authors.
Funding
Abstract
RNA-binding proteins (RBP) play diverse roles in mRNA processing and function. However, from thousands of RBPs encoded in the human genome, a detailed molecular understanding of their interactions with RNA is available only for a small fraction. In most cases, our knowledge of the combination of RNA sequence and structure required for specific RBP binding is insufficient for accurately predicting binding sites transcriptome-wide. In this context, the rapidly expanding collection of transcriptomic data sets that map distinct, yet intertwined posttranscriptional marks, such as RNA structure and RBP binding, presents an opportunity for integrative analysis to better characterize RBP binding. A grand challenge faced by our community is that relatively little information on the secondary structure context within and near RBP-binding sites has been gleaned from integrating such data sets, partially due to lack of suitable computational methods. To engage scientists from diverse backgrounds in addressing this gap, the RNA Society organized the RBP Footprint Grand Challenge in 2021, an international community effort to develop new methods or leverage existing ones for predicting RBP-binding sites through analysis of a growing volume of sequence, structure, and binding data and to experimentally validate select predictions. Here, we report the initiative, analyses, and methods developed by the participants, validation results, and five new in vivo binding data sets generated for validation. We hope our work will inspire additional innovation in computational methods, further utilization of available data resources, and future endeavors to engage the community in collaborating toward closing other critical data-analysis gaps.
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.