ReviewNature genetics2026
Advances and challenges of splicing prediction with AI.
Review in Nature genetics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- ASPIRE: Accurate alternative splicing prediction from limited RNA sequencing data and a minimal gene set.PLoS computational biology · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
RNA alternative splicing is a fundamental post-transcriptional mechanism whose dysregulation drives various human diseases. Predicting splicing outcomes is therefore a central challenge in precision medicine. This Review traces the evolution of computational approaches from early statistical heuristics to modern artificial intelligence frameworks. We dissect the methodologies that shape predictive performance, including training data scale, output resolution, splicing event quantification and model complexity. Among these factors, quantitative assessment of splicing events and the increasing complexity of model architectures represent particularly critical axes that define both biological interpretability and computational feasibility. We further describe how these models empower translational applications, from annotating variant effects to guiding antisense oligonucleotide development. Nonetheless, persistent challenges remain, including the interpretation of deep-intronic mutations, isoform-level reconstruction and integration of multimodal data. Together, these perspectives define both the progress achieved and the opportunities ahead for splicing prediction in genomics and medicine.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42350808What 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.