ArticlePloS one2014
A novel method for identification and quantification of consistently differentially methylated regions.
Article in PloS one, 2014. 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.
- Uncovering alterations in cancer epigenetics via trans-dimensional Markov chain Monte Carlo and hidden Markov models.Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series C, Applied statistics · 2026Article
- An evaluation of the genome-wide false positive rates of common methods for identifying differentially methylated regions using illumina methylation arrays.Epigenetics · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Advances in biotechnology have resulted in large-scale studies of DNA methylation. A differentially methylated region (DMR) is a genomic region with multiple adjacent CpG sites that exhibit different methylation statuses among multiple samples. Many so-called "supervised" methods have been established to identify DMRs between two or more comparison groups. Methods for the identification of DMRs without reference to phenotypic information are, however, less well studied. An alternative "unsupervised" approach was proposed, in which DMRs in studied samples were identified with consideration of nature dependence structure of methylation measurements between neighboring probes from tiling arrays. Through simulation study, we investigated effects of dependencies between neighboring probes on determining DMRs where a lot of spurious signals would be produced if the methylation data were analyzed independently of the probe. In contrast, our newly proposed method could successfully correct for this effect with a well-controlled false positive rate and a comparable sensitivity. By applying to two real datasets, we demonstrated that our method could provide a global picture of methylation variation in studied samples. R source codes to implement the proposed method were freely available at http://www.csjfann.ibms.sinica.edu.tw/eag/programlist/ICDMR/ICDMR.html.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.