Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41520225›Full record

ArticleBriefings in bioinformatics2026

Detection of alternative splicing: deep sequencing or deep learning?

Lena Maria Hackl, Fabian Neuhaus, Sabine Ameling, Uwe Völker, Jan Baumbach, Olga Tsoy

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Briefings in bioinformatics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Lena Maria HacklInstitute for Computational Systems Biology, University of Hamburg, Albert-Einstein-Ring 8-10, Hamburg 22761, Hamburg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-7472-6224
Fabian NeuhausInstitute for Computational Systems Biology, University of Hamburg, Albert-Einstein-Ring 8-10, Hamburg 22761, Hamburg, Germany.
Sabine AmelingInterfaculty Institute for Genetics and Functional Genomics, University Medicine Greifswald, Felix-Hausdorff-Straße 8, Greifswald 17475, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, Germany.
Uwe VölkerInterfaculty Institute for Genetics and Functional Genomics, University Medicine Greifswald, Felix-Hausdorff-Straße 8, Greifswald 17475, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, Germany.
Jan BaumbachInstitute for Computational Systems Biology, University of Hamburg, Albert-Einstein-Ring 8-10, Hamburg 22761, Hamburg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-0282-0462
Olga TsoyInstitute for Computational Systems Biology, University of Hamburg, Albert-Einstein-Ring 8-10, Hamburg 22761, Hamburg, Germany.

Funding

German Federal Ministry of Research, Technology and Space (BMFTR) 031L0287BGerman Federal Ministry of Research, Technology and Space (BMFTR) within the framework of the *e:Med* research and funding concept 01ZX1908AGerman Federal Ministry of Research, Technology and Space (BMFTR) within the framework of the *e:Med* research and funding concept 01ZX2208AGerman Federal Ministry of Research, Technology and Space (BMFTR) within the framework of the *e:Med* research and funding concept 01ZX2208B
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Alternative splicing is a crucial mechanism of gene regulation that enables condition- and tissue-specific expression of gene isoforms. Its dysregulation plays a role in various diseases such as cancer, neurological disorders, and metabolic conditions. Despite its importance, accurate detection of alternative splicing events remains challenging. Comprehensive alternative splicing event detection typically requires deep sequencing with over 100 million reads; however, much of the publicly accessible RNA sequencing data is of lower sequencing depth. Recent advances, particularly deep learning models working with genomic sequences, offer new avenues for predicting alternative splicing without reliance on high sequencing depth data. Our study addresses the question: Can we utilize the vast repository of publicly available RNA sequencing data for comprehensive alternative splicing detection, despite the low sequencing depth? Our results demonstrate the potential of sequence-based deep learning tools such as AlphaGenome, SpliceAI and DeepSplice for initial hypothesis development and as additional filters in standard RNA sequencing pipelines, especially when sequencing depth is limited. Nonetheless, validation with higher sequencing depths remains essential for confirmation of splice events. Overall, our findings underscore the need for integrative methods combining genomic sequence data and RNA sequencing data for the prediction of tissue- and condition-specific alternative splicing in resource-limited settings.

Indexed as

Alternative SplicingDeep LearningHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHumansSequence Analysis, RNAalternative splicing predictioncomputational transcriptomicsdeep learning modelslow sequencing depthRNA sequencingRNA splicing

Identifiers

PMID41520225
PMCPMC12790623

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.