MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403174248 · doi:10.1002/ctd2.70009

Developing messenger RNA biomarkers: A workflow to characterise and identify transcript target sequences unaffected by alternative splicing for reproducible gene transcript quantification by reverse transcriptase quantitative polymerase chain reaction

2024· article· en· W4403174248 on OpenAlexaff
Bhaja K. Padhi, Guillaume Pelletier

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical and Translational Discovery · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA Research and Splicing
Canadian institutionsHealth Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReverse transcriptaseRNA splicingBiologyMessenger RNAGeneAlternative splicingMature messenger RNAComputational biologyRNAPost-transcriptional modificationGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Most eukaryotic genes generate multiple messenger RNA (mRNA) transcript variants by alternative splicing. The incomplete annotation of gene transcripts in genomic databases can result in improper primer design, adversely affecting the reliability of gene expression measurements by reverse transcriptase quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT‐qPCR). Hence, we present a workflow combining bioinformatics analyses, to select two to three evolutionarily conserved constitutive exons in rats, mice and humans as target sequences for PCR primer design, with experimental RT‐PCR amplification and amplicon sequencing to confirm the expression and identity of gene transcript targets. The application of this workflow to the characterization of neurodevelopmental biomarker genes identified an unannotated exon in the rat Map2 gene, illustrating the importance of target sequence validation for the development of translational mRNA biomarkers for toxicological and biomedical studies.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.180
Threshold uncertainty score0.953

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.055
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.320 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical and Translational DiscoverySame topicRNA Research and SplicingFrench-language works237,207