ReviewCurrent genomics2017
Noncoding Variants Functional Prioritization Methods Based on Predicted Regulatory Factor Binding Sites.
Review in Current genomics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Perspectives of Bioinformatics in Big Data Era.Current genomics · 2019Article
- Systematics for types and effects of DNA variations.BMC genomics · 2018Review
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundsWith the advent of the post genomic era, the research for the genetic mechanism of the diseases has found to be increasingly depended on the studies of the genes, the gene-networks and gene-protein interaction networks. To explore gene expression and regulation, the researchers have carried out many studies on transcription factors and their binding sites (TFBSs). Based on the large amount of transcription factor binding sites predicting values in the deep learning models, further computation and analysis have been done to reveal the relationship between the gene mutation and the occurrence of the disease. It has been demonstrated that based on the deep learning methods, the performances of the prediction for the functions of the noncoding variants are outperforming than those of the conventional methods. The research on the prediction for functions of Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms (SNPs) is expected to uncover the mechanism of the gene mutation affection on traits and diseases of human beings.
resultsWe reviewed the conventional TFBSs identification methods from different perspectives. As for the deep learning methods to predict the TFBSs, we discussed the related problems, such as the raw data preprocessing, the structure design of the deep convolution neural network (CNN) and the model performance measure et al. And then we summarized the techniques that usually used in finding out the functional noncoding variants from de novo sequence.
conclusionAlong with the rapid development of the high-throughout assays, more and more sample data and chromatin features would be conducive to improve the prediction accuracy of the deep convolution neural network for TFBSs identification. Meanwhile, getting more insights into the deep CNN framework itself has been proved useful for both the promotion on model performance and the development for more suitable design to sample data. Based on the feature values predicted by the deep CNN model, the prioritization model for functional noncoding variants would contribute to reveal the affection of gene mutation on the diseases.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.