Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42495597›Full record

ReviewScientifica2026

A Systematic Review: Deep Learning for Analyzing Genomic Data to Discover Evolutionary Patterns.

Raha Hassanpour Faramoushjani, Sanam Ansari

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Scientifica, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
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

2 authors.

Raha Hassanpour FaramoushjaniDepartment of Biology, Yazd University, Yazd, Iran, yazd.ac.ir.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0009-8932-3466
Sanam AnsariDepartment of Software Engineering, T.C İstanbul Beykent University Faculty of Engineering Architecture, Istanbul 34396, Turkey.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0003-2737-0132

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Deep learning has been increasingly applied to evolutionary genomics as genomic datasets have grown in scale and complexity. However, the literature encompasses heterogeneous biological objectives, modeling assumptions, and evaluation standards, often treated as a unified field despite important conceptual differences. This study presents a systematic review of research published between 2016 and 2025 on the use of deep learning to identify evolutionary patterns in genomic data. Following a structured screening process, 50 studies were selected for qualitative synthesis. The reviewed applications can be organized into three partially overlapping but conceptually distinct domains: (i) population genetic inference, (ii) phylogenetic reconstruction, and (iii) sequence representation learning using DNA and protein language models. In population genetics, deep learning is predominantly employed within simulation-based inference frameworks. In phylogenetics, neural architectures are used to approximate or accelerate tree and model inference under defined conditions. In representation learning, models focus on extracting transferable sequence features for downstream evolutionary or functional analyses. Across domains, deep learning provides flexible modeling of complex genomic inputs. Nevertheless, recurring limitations include challenges in interpretability, sensitivity to training assumptions-particularly under simulation-based settings-heterogeneous evaluation protocols, and substantial computational demands. By organizing the literature using a domain-aligned framework, this review clarifies domain-specific strengths, limitations, and research gaps, providing a structured basis for future methodological development in evolutionary genomics.

Indexed as

deep learningevolutionary patternsgenomics dataneural networks

Identifiers

PMID42495597
PMCPMC13393291

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.