↓ Skip to main content

Quantification of epigenetic biomarkers: an evaluation of established and emerging methods for DNA methylation analysis

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Genomics, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 tweeters
patent
3 patents

Citations

dimensions_citation
33 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
106 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
Quantification of epigenetic biomarkers: an evaluation of established and emerging methods for DNA methylation analysis
Published in
BMC Genomics, January 2014
DOI 10.1186/1471-2164-15-1174
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nicholas Redshaw, Jim F Huggett, Martin S Taylor, Carole A Foy, Alison S Devonshire

Abstract

DNA methylation is an important epigenetic mechanism in several human diseases, most notably cancer. The quantitative analysis of DNA methylation patterns has the potential to serve as diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers, however, there is currently a lack of consensus regarding the optimal methodologies to quantify methylation status. To address this issue we compared five analytical methods: (i) MethyLight qPCR, (ii) MethyLight digital PCR (dPCR), methylation-sensitive and -dependent restriction enzyme (MSRE/MDRE) digestion followed by (iii) qPCR or (iv) dPCR, and (v) bisulfite amplicon next generation sequencing (NGS). The techniques were evaluated for linearity, accuracy and precision.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 106 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Korea, Republic of 1 <1%
Ireland 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 100 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 33 31%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 16%
Student > Master 12 11%
Student > Bachelor 7 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 6%
Other 19 18%
Unknown 12 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 39 37%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 31 29%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 9%
Environmental Science 2 2%
Chemistry 2 2%
Other 7 7%
Unknown 15 14%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 25 February 2021.
All research outputs
#2,540,010
of 18,716,128 outputs
Outputs from BMC Genomics
#1,058
of 9,625 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#44,807
of 321,949 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Genomics
#15
of 192 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,716,128 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,625 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its peers.
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 321,949 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 192 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.