ArticleEpigenetics2022
An evaluation of the genome-wide false positive rates of common methods for identifying differentially methylated regions using illumina methylation arrays.
Article in Epigenetics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Benchmarking of methods to analyse data derived from GBS-MeDIP.BMC bioinformatics · 2026Article
- ReMeDy: A Flexible Statistical Framework For Region-based Detection of DNA Methylation Dysregulation.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- DNA methylation and telomere length in 2-5 year olds with intrauterine preeclampsia exposure: a P4 sub-study.Clinical epigenetics · 2025Article
- Topsicle: a method for estimating telomere length from whole genome long-read sequencing data.Genome biology · 2025Article
- Using parenclitic networks on phaeochromocytoma and paraganglioma tumours provides novel insights on global DNA methylation.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Best practices for germline variant and DNA methylation analysis of second- and third-generation sequencing data.Human genomics · 2024Review
- Cortico-striatal differences in the epigenome in attention-deficit/ hyperactivity disorder.Translational psychiatry · 2024Article
- DNA methylation changes in association with trauma-focused psychotherapy efficacy in treatment-resistant depression patients: a prospective longitudinal study.European journal of psychotraumatology · 2024Article
- A novel principal component based method for identifying differentially methylated regions in Illumina Infinium MethylationEPIC BeadChip data.Epigenetics · 2023Article
- Comprehensive evaluation of the implementation of episignatures for diagnosis of neurodevelopmental disorders (NDDs).Human genetics · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Differentially methylated regions (DMRs) are genomic regions with specific methylation patterns across multiple loci that are associated with a phenotype. We examined the genome-wide false positive (GFP) rates of five widely used DMR methods: comb-p, Bumphunter, DMRcate, mCSEA and coMethDMR using both Illumina HumanMethylation450 (450 K) and MethylationEPIC (EPIC) data and simulated continuous and dichotomous null phenotypes (i.e., generated independently of methylation data). coMethDMR provided well-controlled GFP rates (~5%) except when analysing skewed continuous phenotypes. DMRcate generally had well-controlled GFP rates when applied to 450 K data except for the skewed continuous phenotype and EPIC data only for the normally distributed continuous phenotype. GFP rates for mCSEA were at least 0.096 and comb-p yielded GFP rates above 0.34. Bumphunter had high GFP rates of at least 0.35 across conditions, reaching as high as 0.95. Analysis of the performance of these methods in specific regions of the genome found that regions with higher correlation across loci had higher regional false positive rates on average across methods. Based on the false positive rates, coMethDMR is the most recommended analysis method, and DMRcate had acceptable performance when analysing 450 K data. However, as both could display higher levels of FPs for skewed continuous distributions, a normalizing transformation of skewed continuous phenotypes is suggested. This study highlights the importance of genome-wide simulations when evaluating the performance of DMR-analysis methods.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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 Socratic graph.