Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42171013›Full record

ReviewThe Biochemical journal2026

Computational modelling of cell identity.

Woo Jun Shim, Chris Siu Yeung Chow, Shaine Chenxin Bao, Qiongyi Zhao, Nathan J Palpant

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The Biochemical journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

Woo Jun ShimInstitute for Molecular Bioscience, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-9446-7821
Chris Siu Yeung ChowInstitute for Molecular Bioscience, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.ORCID 0009-0008-9337-6694
Shaine Chenxin BaoInstitute for Molecular Bioscience, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
Qiongyi ZhaoInstitute for Molecular Bioscience, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
Nathan J PalpantInstitute for Molecular Bioscience, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.

Funding

The Medical Research Future Fund APP2016033The National Heart Foundation Australia 106721
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Deciphering cell identity remains a central challenge in biology, as experimental profiling can only capture a fraction of the molecular diversity across human cell states. Computational modelling fills this gap by offering scalable predictions beyond what experimental assays can measure. These models play key roles in classifying cell type, discovering previously unknown states, interpreting perturbation responses, and generating hypotheses for contexts that are experimentally inaccessible. The rapid expansion of consortium-level data has enabled models to learn generalisable genomic features of cell identity. In the present review, we examine 43 representative computational methods utilising information extracted from genomic regulatory elements, marker genes, or reference atlases and traditional machine learning or transformer-based approaches for cell identity inference. By outlining biological rationales, applications, and limitations of these methods in a minimally technical tone, the review serves as a practical guide for biologists to choose appropriate methods for their specific analytical needs.

Indexed as

Computational BiologyComputer SimulationModels, BiologicalAnimalsHumansMachine Learningbioinformaticscell identitycomputational modelsgene expression and regulationmachine learning

Identifiers

PMID42171013
PMCPMC13199844

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.