↓ Skip to main content

Population Epigenetics

Overview of attention for book
Attention for Chapter 266: Correcting for Sample Heterogeneity in Methylome-Wide Association Studies.
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
8 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.
Chapter title
Correcting for Sample Heterogeneity in Methylome-Wide Association Studies.
Chapter number 266
Book title
Population Epigenetics
Published in
Methods in molecular biology, August 2015
DOI 10.1007/7651_2015_266
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-1-4939-6901-2, 978-1-4939-6903-6
Authors

Zou, James Y, James Y. Zou

Abstract

Epigenome-wide association studies (EWAS) face many of the same challenges as genome-wide association studies (GWAS), but have an added challenge in that the epigenome can vary dramatically across cell types. When cell-type composition differs between cases and controls, this leads to spurious associations that may obscure true associations. We have developed a computational method, FaST-LMM-EWASher, which automatically corrects for cell-type composition without needing explicit knowledge of it. In this chapter, we provide a tutorial on using FaST-LMM-EWASher for DNA methylation data and discuss data analysis strategies.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 8 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 8 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 3 38%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 25%
Unknown 3 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 25%
Computer Science 1 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 13%
Unknown 3 38%

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 08 August 2015.
All research outputs
#3,843,639
of 5,462,004 outputs
Outputs from Methods in molecular biology
#2,057
of 4,274 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#132,586
of 191,634 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Methods in molecular biology
#52
of 96 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 5,462,004 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,274 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.5. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% 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 191,634 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 96 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.