Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31831061›Full record

ReviewClinical epigenetics2019

DNA methylation data by sequencing: experimental approaches and recommendations for tools and pipelines for data analysis.

Ieva Rauluseviciute, Finn Drabløs, Morten Beck Rye

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical epigenetics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 52 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
52citing papers in PubMed
–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

52 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. From DNA to Big Data: NGS Technologies and Their Applications.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2025
    Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Methods in DNA methylation array dataset analysis: A review.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2024
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Toward DNA-Based Recording of Biological Processes.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Review
  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

3 authors.

Ieva RauluseviciuteDepartment of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, NTNU - Norwegian University of Science and Technology, P.O. Box 8905, NO-7491, Trondheim, Norway. ieva.rauluseviciute@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0001-9253-8825
Finn DrabløsDepartment of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, NTNU - Norwegian University of Science and Technology, P.O. Box 8905, NO-7491, Trondheim, Norway.
Morten Beck RyeDepartment of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, NTNU - Norwegian University of Science and Technology, P.O. Box 8905, NO-7491, Trondheim, Norway.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Sequencing technologies have changed not only our approaches to classical genetics, but also the field of epigenetics. Specific methods allow scientists to identify novel genome-wide epigenetic patterns of DNA methylation down to single-nucleotide resolution. DNA methylation is the most researched epigenetic mark involved in various processes in the human cell, including gene regulation and development of diseases, such as cancer. Increasing numbers of DNA methylation sequencing datasets from human genome are produced using various platforms-from methylated DNA precipitation to the whole genome bisulfite sequencing. Many of those datasets are fully accessible for repeated analyses. Sequencing experiments have become routine in laboratories around the world, while analysis of outcoming data is still a challenge among the majority of scientists, since in many cases it requires advanced computational skills. Even though various tools are being created and published, guidelines for their selection are often not clear, especially to non-bioinformaticians with limited experience in computational analyses. Separate tools are often used for individual steps in the analysis, and these can be challenging to manage and integrate. However, in some instances, tools are combined into pipelines that are capable to complete all the essential steps to achieve the result. In the case of DNA methylation sequencing analysis, the goal of such pipeline is to map sequencing reads, calculate methylation levels, and distinguish differentially methylated positions and/or regions. The objective of this review is to describe basic principles and steps in the analysis of DNA methylation sequencing data that in particular have been used for mammalian genomes, and more importantly to present and discuss the most pronounced computational pipelines that can be used to analyze such data. We aim to provide a good starting point for scientists with limited experience in computational analyses of DNA methylation and hydroxymethylation data, and recommend a few tools that are powerful, but still easy enough to use for their own data analysis.

Indexed as

DNA MethylationComputational BiologyData AnalysisEpigenesis, GeneticGenome, HumanHumansSequence Analysis, DNASoftwareBisulfite sequencingComputational pipelinesDNA methylationHydroxymethylation

Identifiers

PMID31831061
PMCPMC6909609

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.