↓ Skip to main content

BoostMe accurately predicts DNA methylation values in whole-genome bisulfite sequencing of multiple human tissues

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Genomics, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
11 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
36 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
68 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
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
BoostMe accurately predicts DNA methylation values in whole-genome bisulfite sequencing of multiple human tissues
Published in
BMC Genomics, May 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12864-018-4766-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Luli S. Zou, Michael R. Erdos, D. Leland Taylor, Peter S. Chines, Arushi Varshney, The McDonnell Genome Institute, Stephen C. J. Parker, Francis S. Collins, John P. Didion

Abstract

Bisulfite sequencing is widely employed to study the role of DNA methylation in disease; however, the data suffer from biases due to coverage depth variability. Imputation of methylation values at low-coverage sites may mitigate these biases while also identifying important genomic features associated with predictive power. Here we describe BoostMe, a method for imputing low-quality DNA methylation estimates within whole-genome bisulfite sequencing (WGBS) data. BoostMe uses a gradient boosting algorithm, XGBoost, and leverages information from multiple samples for prediction. We find that BoostMe outperforms existing algorithms in speed and accuracy when applied to WGBS of human tissues. Furthermore, we show that imputation improves concordance between WGBS and the MethylationEPIC array at low WGBS depth, suggesting improved WGBS accuracy after imputation. Our findings support the use of BoostMe as a preprocessing step for WGBS analysis.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 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 68 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 68 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 26%
Researcher 10 15%
Student > Bachelor 7 10%
Student > Master 6 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 7%
Other 8 12%
Unknown 14 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 18 26%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 18%
Computer Science 5 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 3%
Neuroscience 2 3%
Other 12 18%
Unknown 17 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 10 June 2019.
All research outputs
#6,495,853
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Genomics
#2,689
of 10,793 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#110,149
of 332,353 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Genomics
#66
of 255 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,793 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 332,353 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 255 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.