Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37039682›Full record

ArticleBriefings in bioinformatics2023

Evaluation of epitranscriptome-wide N6-methyladenosine differential analysis methods.

Daoyu Duan, Wen Tang, Runshu Wang, Zhenxing Guo, Hao Feng

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Briefings in bioinformatics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Daoyu DuanDepartment of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, 44106, Ohio, USA.
Wen TangDepartment of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, 44106, Ohio, USA.
Runshu WangDepartment of Biostatistics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, 48109, Michigan, USA.
Zhenxing GuoSchool of Data Science, The Chinese University of Hong Kong - Shenzhen, Shenzhen, 518172, Guangdong, China.
Hao FengDepartment of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, 44106, Ohio, USA.
Case Western Reserve University · USChinese University of Hong Kong, Shenzhen · CNUniversity of Michigan · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

RNA methylation has emerged recently as an active research domain to study post-transcriptional alteration in gene expression regulation. Various types of RNA methylation, including N6-methyladenosine (m6A), are involved in human disease development. As a newly developed sequencing biotechnology to quantify the m6A level on a transcriptome-wide scale, MeRIP-seq expands RNA epigenetics study in both basic and clinical applications, with an upward trend. One of the fundamental questions in RNA methylation data analysis is to identify the Differentially Methylated Regions (DMRs), by contrasting cases and controls. Multiple statistical approaches have been recently developed for DMR detection, but there is a lack of a comprehensive evaluation for these analytical methods. Here, we thoroughly assess all eight existing methods for DMR calling, using both synthetic and real data. Our simulation adopts a Gamma-Poisson model and logit linear framework, and accommodates various sample sizes and DMR proportions for benchmarking. For all methods, low sensitivities are observed among regions with low input levels, but they can be drastically boosted by an increase in sample size. TRESS and exomePeak2 perform the best using metrics of detection precision, FDR, type I error control and runtime, though hampered by low sensitivity. DRME and exomePeak obtain high sensitivities, at the expense of inflated FDR and type I error. Analyses on three real datasets suggest differential preference on identified DMR length and uniquely discovered regions, between these methods.

Indexed as

RNATranscriptomeAdenosineHumansMethylationSequence Analysis, RNAAdenosineRNADifferentially Methylated RegionsEpigenomicsMeRIP-seqN6-methyladenosineRNA Methylation

Identifiers

PMID37039682
PMCPMC10199761
OpenAlexW4364354272

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.