↓ Skip to main content

On the potential of models for location and scale for genome-wide DNA methylation data

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Bioinformatics, July 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
65 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
On the potential of models for location and scale for genome-wide DNA methylation data
Published in
BMC Bioinformatics, July 2014
DOI 10.1186/1471-2105-15-232
Pubmed ID
Authors

Simone Wahl, Nora Fenske, Sonja Zeilinger, Karsten Suhre, Christian Gieger, Melanie Waldenberger, Harald Grallert, Matthias Schmid

Abstract

With the help of epigenome-wide association studies (EWAS), increasing knowledge on the role of epigenetic mechanisms such as DNA methylation in disease processes is obtained. In addition, EWAS aid the understanding of behavioral and environmental effects on DNA methylation. In terms of statistical analysis, specific challenges arise from the characteristics of methylation data. First, methylation β-values represent proportions with skewed and heteroscedastic distributions. Thus, traditional modeling strategies assuming a normally distributed response might not be appropriate. Second, recent evidence suggests that not only mean differences but also variability in site-specific DNA methylation associates with diseases, including cancer. The purpose of this study was to compare different modeling strategies for methylation data in terms of model performance and performance of downstream hypothesis tests. Specifically, we used the generalized additive models for location, scale and shape (GAMLSS) framework to compare beta regression with Gaussian regression on raw, binary logit and arcsine square root transformed methylation data, with and without modeling a covariate effect on the scale parameter.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 3%
United Kingdom 1 2%
New Zealand 1 2%
Spain 1 2%
Unknown 60 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 34%
Researcher 15 23%
Student > Bachelor 6 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 6%
Other 8 12%
Unknown 5 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 16 25%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 15%
Computer Science 4 6%
Mathematics 3 5%
Other 11 17%
Unknown 8 12%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 July 2014.
All research outputs
#15,302,478
of 22,758,248 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#5,372
of 7,272 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#133,082
of 227,671 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#98
of 146 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,758,248 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,272 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 227,671 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 146 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.