Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31894124›Full record

ReviewJournal of biosciences2019

A review of computational algorithms for CpG islands detection.

Rana Adnan Tahir, D A Zheng, Amina Nazir, Hong Qing

Abstract readReview
PubMed
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of biosciences, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 35% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. CGRP: A New Endogenous Cell Stemness Maintenance Molecule.Oxidative medicine and cellular longevity · 2022
    Review
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 at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Rana Adnan Tahir
D A Zheng
Amina Nazir
Hong Qing
Beijing Institute of Technology · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

CpG islands are generally known as the epigenetic regulatory regions in accordance with histone modifications, methylation, and promoter activity. There is a significant need for the exact mapping of DNA methylation in CpG islands to understand the diverse biological functions. However, the precise identification of CpG islands from the whole genome through experimental and computational approaches is still challenging. Numerous computational methods are being developed to detect the CpG-enriched regions, effectively, to reduce the time and cost of the experiments. Here, we review some of the latest computational CpG detection methods that utilize clustering, patterns and physical-distance like parameters for CpG island detection. The comparative analyses of the methods relying on different principles and parameters allow prioritizing the algorithms for specific CpG associated datasets to achieve higher accuracy and sensitivity. A number of computational tools based on the window, Hidden Markov Model, density and distance-/length-based algorithms are being applied on human or mammalian genomes for accurate CpG detection. Comparative analyses of CpG island detection algorithms facilitate to prefer the method according to the target genome and required parameters to attain higher accuracy, specificity, and performance. There is still a need for efficient computational CpG detection methods with lower false-positive results. This review provides a better understanding about the principles of tools that will assist to prioritize and develop the algorithms for accurate CpG islands detection.

Indexed as

Computational BiologyAlgorithmsCluster AnalysisCpG IslandsDNA MethylationGenome, HumanHumansRegulatory Sequences, Nucleic Acid

Identifiers

PMID31894124
OpenAlexW2983734931

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.