Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Catherine Hoyo
dblp:239/0871
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2019
0000-0002-2466-8617ORCID · reported
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 1
Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.
| Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
1 paper |
Bioinformatics and computational biology · 100% |
Topics — the 2 heaviest of 2, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Bioinformatics and computational biology › epigenomics
differential methylation analysis |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Differential methylation values in differential methylation analysis · Bioinform. 2019 |
Bioinformatics and computational biology › epigenomics › DNA methylation › DNA methylation analysis
methylation level estimation |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Differential methylation values in differential methylation analysis · Bioinform. 2019 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
linear regression · 0.4
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | Differential methylation values in differential methylation analysisabstractMOTIVATION: Both β-value and M-value have been used as metrics to measure methylation levels. The M-value is more statistically valid for the differential analysis of methylation levels. However, the β-value is much more biologically interpretable and needs to be reported when M-value method is used for conducting differential methylation analysis. There is an urgent need to know how to interpret the degree of differential methylation from the M-value. In M-value linear regression model, differential methylation M-value ΔM can be easily obtained from the coefficient estimate, but it is not straightforward to get the differential methylation β-value, Δβ since it cannot be obtained from the coefficient alone. RESULTS: To fill the gap, we have built a bridge to connect the statistically sound M-value linear regression model and the biologically interpretable Δβ. In this article, three methods were proposed to calculate differential methylation values, Δβ from M-value linear regression model and compared with the Δβ directly obtained from β-value linear regression model. We showed that under the condition that M-value linear regression model is correct, the method M-model-coef is the best among the four methods. M-model-M-mean method works very well too. If the coefficients α0, α2,…αp are not given (as 'MethLAB' package), the M-model-M-mean method should be used. The Δβ directly obtained from β-value linear regression model can give very biased results, especially when M-values are not in (-2, 2) or β-values are not in (0.2, 0.8). AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: The dataset for example is available at the National Center for Biotechnology Information Gene Expression Omnibus repository, GSE104778. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online. Changchun Xie, Yuet-Kin Leung, Aimin Chen, Ding-Xin Long, Catherine Hoyo, Shuk-Mei Ho |
Bioinform. | 5 |