Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42743975›Full record

ReviewBriefings in bioinformatics2026

Phage bioinformatics tools: a review of computational approaches for bacteriophage research.

Sean Jia Le Pang, Soon Keong Wee, Eric Peng Huat Yap

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Briefings in bioinformatics, 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

3 authors.

Sean Jia Le PangInstitute for Digital Molecular Analytics and Science, Interdisciplinary Graduate Programme, Nanyang Technological University, 61 Nanyang Drive, Academic Block North, ABN-01b-11, 637335, Singapore.
Soon Keong WeeInstitute for Digital Molecular Analytics and Science, Nanyang Technological University, 59 Nanyang Drive, Experimental Medicine Building EMB-06-35 (Level 6), 636921, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0002-8800-5134
Eric Peng Huat YapInstitute for Digital Molecular Analytics and Science, Nanyang Technological University, 59 Nanyang Drive, Experimental Medicine Building EMB-06-35 (Level 6), 636921, Singapore.

Funding

NTU Research ScholarshipResearch Center for Excellence IDMxS
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Rising clinical interest in phage therapy and the exponential growth of metagenomic sequence catalogues have driven a rapid expansion of bacteriophage bioinformatics. More than 80 dedicated tools, mostly published since 2020, now span identification, assembly, annotation, taxonomy, lifestyle prediction, defence-system detection, and host prediction. Aimed at experienced practitioners and developers, this review synthesizes the field through the lens of three successive computational paradigms: sequence homology, bounded by database completeness; machine learning, constrained by labelled training data; and foundation models, which now achieve Matthews correlation coefficients above 0.95 in identification tasks and, through structure-informed prediction, raise functional annotation to over half of phage genes. Furthermore, we map the upstream components, namely, gene callers, homology engines, protein language models, and structural search tools, that underpin most downstream pipelines, exposing shared infrastructure and ecosystem-level fragility when dependencies change. To translate this into practice, we propose web-based and command-line reference workflows calibrated to user expertise and sample types. Finally, we set an agenda for the next wave of tool development. Roughly half of phage genes still resist functional annotation despite structural methods; no broadly generalizable strain-level host predictor exists for phage therapy; varying true-positive rates (0%-97%) underscore the absence of standardized community benchmarks analogous to Critical Assessment of Structure Prediction or Critical Assessment of Metagenome Interpretation. As generative genome models begin designing synthetic phages, progress will depend less on producing standalone tools than on rigorous evaluation, interoperable infrastructure, and clinically meaningful prediction targets.

Indexed as

BacteriophagesComputational BiologySoftwareGenome, ViralMachine LearningMetagenomicsbacteriophagebioinformaticsfoundation modelshost predictionprotein structureviral metagenomics

Identifiers

PMID42743975
PMCPMC13577670

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.