Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31035919›Full record

ArticleBMC bioinformatics2019

pwrEWAS: a user-friendly tool for comprehensive power estimation for epigenome wide association studies (EWAS).

Stefan Graw, Rosalyn Henn, Jeffrey A Thompson, Devin C Koestler

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 47 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
47citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

47 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Stefan GrawDepartment of Biostatistics & Data Science, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, USA. sgraw@kumc.edu.
Rosalyn HennDepartment of Cancer Biology, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, USA.
Jeffrey A ThompsonDepartment of Biostatistics & Data Science, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, USA.
Devin C KoestlerDepartment of Biostatistics & Data Science, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, USA.

Funding

Mentoring CoreP20GM103418 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS MEDICAL CENTER · PI Douglas E Wright · 2012 to 2026
$63.0M
Using Integrated Omics to Identify Dysfunctional Genetic Mechanisms Influencing Schizophrenia and Sleep DisturbancesP20GM130423 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS MEDICAL CENTER · PI Kalyani Pyaram, Steven Allan Soper · 2019 to 2026
$21.5M
Widely Distributed Software for Using Mass Spectrometry to Identify GlycansR01GM103428 · NIGMS · PALO ALTO RESEARCH CENTER · PI BERN, MARSHALL WAYNE · 2012 to 2013
$799k
NIGMS NIH HHS P20 GM103418NIGMS NIH HHS P20GM103428NIGMS NIH HHS P20 GM130423NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM103428
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhen designing an epigenome-wide association study (EWAS) to investigate the relationship between DNA methylation (DNAm) and some exposure(s) or phenotype(s), it is critically important to assess the sample size needed to detect a hypothesized difference with adequate statistical power. However, the complex and nuanced nature of DNAm data makes direct assessment of statistical power challenging. To circumvent these challenges and to address the outstanding need for a user-friendly interface for EWAS power evaluation, we have developed pwrEWAS.

resultsThe current implementation of pwrEWAS accommodates power estimation for two-group comparisons of DNAm (e.g. case vs control, exposed vs non-exposed, etc.), where methylation assessment is carried out using the Illumina Human Methylation BeadChip technology. Power is calculated using a semi-parametric simulation-based approach in which DNAm data is randomly generated from beta-distributions using CpG-specific means and variances estimated from one of several different existing DNAm data sets, chosen to cover the most common tissue-types used in EWAS. In addition to specifying the tissue type to be used for DNAm profiling, users are required to specify the sample size, number of differentially methylated CpGs, effect size(s) (Δ

conclusionBoth under- and overpowered studies unnecessarily deplete resources and even risk failure of a study. With pwrEWAS, we provide a user-friendly tool to help researchers circumvent these risks and to assist in the design and planning of EWAS. AVAILABILITY: The web interface is written in the R statistical programming language using Shiny (RStudio Inc., 2016) and is available at https://biostats-shinyr.kumc.edu/pwrEWAS/ . The R package for pwrEWAS is publicly available at GitHub ( https://github.com/stefangraw/pwrEWAS ).

Indexed as

Epigenesis, GeneticUser-Computer InterfaceCpG IslandsDNA MethylationHumansLinear ModelsPhenotypeProportional Hazards ModelsVapingBioconductor packageDNA methylationIllumina human methylation BeadChipMicroarray data analysisSample size calculationStatistical power

Identifiers

PMID31035919
PMCPMC6489300

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.