ArticleRNA biology2020
Predicting RNA SHAPE scores with deep learning.
Article in RNA biology, 2020. 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.
- Deep learning for RNA secondary structure determination: gauging generalizability and broadening the scope of traditional methods.RNA (New York, N.Y.) · 2026Review
- Deep Learning for RNA Secondary Structure Determination: Gauging Generalizability and Broadening the Scope of Traditional Methods.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
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
Secondary structure prediction approaches rely typically on models of equilibrium free energies that are themselves based on in vitro physical chemistry. Recent transcriptome-wide experiments of in vivo RNA structure based on SHAPE-MaP experiments provide important information that may make it possible to extend current in vitro-based RNA folding models in order to improve the accuracy of computational RNA folding simulations with respect to the experimentally measured in vivo RNA secondary structure. Here we present a machine learning approach that utilizes RNA secondary structure prediction results and nucleotide sequence in order to predict in vivo SHAPE scores. We show that this approach has a higher Pearson correlation coefficient with experimental SHAPE scores than thermodynamic folding. This could be an important step towards augmenting experimental results with computational predictions and help with RNA secondary structure predictions that inherently take in-vivo folding properties into account.
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.