ArticleBioinformatics advances2026
metaAPA: a tool for integration of PolyA site predictions from single-cell and spatial transcriptomics.
Article in Bioinformatics advances, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Motivation: Single-cell 3'-tagging sequencing, such as that provided by 10x Genomics, can be used to study alternative polyadenylation (APA). APA can affect RNA function, stability, and subcellular localization, thereby influencing development and disease processes. Computational tools based on various algorithms, such as Sierra, polyApipe, and SCAPE, have been developed to infer polyA site positions from scRNA-seq data. However, these methods exhibit significant differences in the number of predicted sites and positional inconsistencies in the sites identified for the same gene, leading to divergent conclusions when analyzing the same data with different tools. Results: We designed two strategies to integrate the outputs of alternative APA tools, enabling users to select appropriate polyA site sets based on their specific needs. Our method can be used to extract high-confidence sites, supported by all tools, as well as putative sites supported by a subset of tools. We find that tools with high sensitivity for detecting APA sites can be usefully augmented by tools with higher positional accuracy but lower sensitivity. We show that our method obtains the expected number of high-confidence sites and that these sites exhibit the expected biological sequence characteristics. Availability and implementation: https://github.com/ManchesterBioinference/metaAPA.
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.