Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37315069›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2023

Recall DNA methylation levels at low coverage sites using a CNN model in WGBS.

Ximei Luo, Yansu Wang, Quan Zou, Lei Xu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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.

Ximei LuoSchool of Electronic and Communication Engineering, Shenzhen Polytechnic, Shenzhen, Guangdong, China.ORCID 0000-0003-2956-6799
Yansu WangSchool of Electronic and Communication Engineering, Shenzhen Polytechnic, Shenzhen, Guangdong, China.
Quan ZouInstitute of Fundamental and Frontier Sciences, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.ORCID 0000-0001-6406-1142
Lei XuSchool of Electronic and Communication Engineering, Shenzhen Polytechnic, Shenzhen, Guangdong, China.ORCID 0000-0002-6440-6881

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

DNA methylation is an important regulator of gene transcription. WGBS is the gold-standard approach for base-pair resolution quantitative of DNA methylation. It requires high sequencing depth. Many CpG sites with insufficient coverage in the WGBS data, resulting in inaccurate DNA methylation levels of individual sites. Many state-of-arts computation methods were proposed to predict the missing value. However, many methods required either other omics datasets or other cross-sample data. And most of them only predicted the state of DNA methylation. In this study, we proposed the RcWGBS, which can impute the missing (or low coverage) values from the DNA methylation levels on the adjacent sides. Deep learning techniques were employed for the accurate prediction. The WGBS datasets of H1-hESC and GM12878 were down-sampled. The average difference between the DNA methylation level at 12× depth predicted by RcWGBS and that at >50× depth in the H1-hESC and GM2878 cells are less than 0.03 and 0.01, respectively. RcWGBS performed better than METHimpute even though the sequencing depth was as low as 12×. Our work would help to process methylation data of low sequencing depth. It is beneficial for researchers to save sequencing costs and improve data utilization through computational methods.

Indexed as

DNA MethylationHuman Embryonic Stem CellsHumansMental RecallProtein Processing, Post-TranslationalResearch Personnel

Identifiers

PMID37315069
PMCPMC10266633

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.