ArticleGenomics, proteomics & bioinformatics2024
Evaluating Performance of Different RNA Secondary Structure Prediction Programs Using Self-cleaving Ribozymes.
Article in Genomics, proteomics & bioinformatics, 2024. 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.
- Benchmarking the methods for predicting base pairs in RNA-RNA interactions.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Accurate identification of the correct, biologically relevant RNA structures is critical to understanding various aspects of RNA biology since proper folding represents the key to the functionality of all types of RNA molecules and plays pivotal roles in many essential biological processes. Thus, a plethora of approaches have been developed to predict, identify, or solve RNA structures based on various computational, molecular, genetic, chemical, or physicochemical strategies. Purely computational approaches hold distinct advantages over all other strategies in terms of the ease of implementation, time, speed, cost, and throughput, but they strongly underperform in terms of accuracy that significantly limits their broader application. Nonetheless, the advantages of these methods led to a steady development of multiple in silico RNA secondary structure prediction approaches including recent deep learning-based programs. Here, we compared the accuracy of predictions of biologically relevant secondary structures of dozens of self-cleaving ribozyme sequences using seven in silico RNA folding prediction tools with tasks of varying complexity. We found that while many programs performed well in relatively simple tasks, their performance varied significantly in more complex RNA folding problems. However, in general, a modern deep learning method outperformed the other programs in the complex tasks in predicting the RNA secondary structures, at least based on the specific class of sequences tested, suggesting that it may represent the future of RNA structure prediction algorithms.
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.