ArticleNAR genomics and bioinformatics2021
Differential ATAC-seq and ChIP-seq peak detection using ROTS.
Article in NAR genomics and bioinformatics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- REACTOR: REgulon Activity analysis and Comparison Tool for single-cell transcriptOmics Research.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- MOCHA's advanced statistical modeling of scATAC-seq data enables functional genomic inference in large human cohorts.Nature communications · 2024Article
- DiffChIPL: a differential peak analysis method for high-throughput sequencing data with biological replicates based on limma.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Changes in cellular chromatin states fine-tune transcriptional output and ultimately lead to phenotypic changes. Here we propose a novel application of our reproducibility-optimized test statistics (ROTS) to detect differential chromatin states (ATAC-seq) or differential chromatin modification states (ChIP-seq) between conditions. We compare the performance of ROTS to existing and widely used methods for ATAC-seq and ChIP-seq data using both synthetic and real datasets. Our results show that ROTS outperformed other commonly used methods when analyzing ATAC-seq data. ROTS also displayed the most accurate detection of small differences when modeling with synthetic data. We observed that two-step methods that require the use of a separate peak caller often more accurately called enrichment borders, whereas one-step methods without a separate peak calling step were more versatile in calling sub-peaks. The top ranked differential regions detected by the methods had marked correlation with transcriptional differences of the closest genes. Overall, our study provides evidence that ROTS is a useful addition to the available differential peak detection methods to study chromatin and performs especially well when applied to study differential chromatin states in ATAC-seq data.
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.