↓ Skip to main content

Statistical challenges of high‐dimensional methylation data

Overview of attention for article published in Statistics in Medicine, July 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
73 Mendeley
citeulike
1 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.
Article details
Title
Statistical challenges of high‐dimensional methylation data
Published in
Statistics in Medicine, July 2014
DOI 10.1002/sim.6251
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

With the fast growing field of epigenetics comes the need to better understand the intricacies of DNA methylation data analysis. High-throughput profiling using techniques, such as Illumina's BeadArray assay, enable the quantitative assessment of methylation. Challenges arise from the fact that resulting methylation levels (so-called beta values) are proportions between 0 and 1, often from an asymmetric, bimodal distribution with peaks close to 0 and 1. Therefore, the majority of standard statistical approaches do not apply. The logit transformation into so-called M-values is a common approach to circumvent this problem and aims to allow the use of common statistical methods. However, it can be observed that the transformation from beta to M-values does not necessarily result in an approximately homoscedastic distribution. Often, bimodality, asymmetry and heteroscedasticity are conserved even after transformation. We give an overview and discussion of methods suggested in the recent years that attempt to address the characteristics of methylation data in univariate screening settings. In order to identify 'differential' methylation with respect to covariates of interest while adjusting for confounders, we compare parametric methods, such as linear and beta regression, and nonparametric methods, such as rank-based regression. Our goal is to sensitise researchers to the challenges and issues that arise from this type of data as well as to present possible solutions.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 73 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 3 4%
United Kingdom 3 4%
Spain 1 1%
Australia 1 1%
Unknown 65 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 32%
Researcher 15 21%
Student > Master 10 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 5%
Student > Bachelor 3 4%
Other 9 12%
Unknown 9 12%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 17 23%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 12%
Mathematics 8 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 10%
Computer Science 6 8%
Other 15 21%
Unknown 11 15%
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 20 August 2015.
All research outputs
#18,889,654
of 27,387,710 outputs
Outputs from Statistics in Medicine
#2,607
of 4,263 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#152,475
of 245,302 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Statistics in Medicine
#17
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 27,387,710 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,263 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 245,302 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 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 60% of its contemporaries.