CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 94

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Comparison of DNA methylation measured by Illumina 450K and EPIC BeadChips in blood of newborns and 14-year-old children

Solomon, Olivia, MacIsaac, Julie, Quach, Hong, Tindula, Gwen, Kobor, Michael S., Huen, Karen, Meaney, Michael J., Eskenazi, Brenda, Barcellos, Lisa F., Holland, Nina·2018·Epigenetics
DOI 10.1080/15592294.2018.1497386PMC PMC6140901
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/15592294.2018.1497386

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1. β values for all overlapping probes on 450K vs. beta values on EPIC for a newborn sample.
Figure 1. β values for all overlapping probes on 450K vs. beta values on EPIC for a newborn sample.CC BY-NC-ND · PubMed Central
Figure 2. Distribution of correlation coefficients for individual CpG sites, separated by probe type. Type II probes have a greater density of CpG sites with higher correlation coefficients.
Figure 2. Distribution of correlation coefficients for individual CpG sites, separated by probe type. Type II probes have a greater density of CpG sites with higher correlation coefficients.CC BY-NC-ND · PubMed Central
Figure 3. The correlation of β values between 450K and EPIC relative to the variance of methylation at each site (top). Sites in the lowest quartile of correlation had low variance and were mostly completely methylated or completely unmethylated (bottom left). Sites in the highest quartile of correlation had high variance of methylation (bottom right).
Figure 3. The correlation of β values between 450K and EPIC relative to the variance of methylation at each site (top). Sites in the lowest quartile of correlation had low variance and were mostly completely methylated or completely unmethylated (bottom left). Sites in the highest quartile of correlation had high variance of methylation (bottom right).CC BY-NC-ND · PubMed Central
Figure 4. The absolute difference in β value at each CpG site between 450K and EPIC for newborns is plotted on the y-axis. Sites which also showed large differences >0.25 in the 14-year data set are highlighted in green and counts of sites exceeding thresholds of 0.1, 0.25, and 0.5 are shown on the right side of the plot.
Figure 4. The absolute difference in β value at each CpG site between 450K and EPIC for newborns is plotted on the y-axis. Sites which also showed large differences >0.25 in the 14-year data set are highlighted in green and counts of sites exceeding thresholds of 0.1, 0.25, and 0.5 are shown on the right side of the plot.CC BY-NC-ND · PubMed Central
Figure 5. Regression β values for all overlapping probes on 450K vs. regression beta values on EPIC analyses of differentially methylation positions by sex in newborns.
Figure 5. Regression β values for all overlapping probes on 450K vs. regression beta values on EPIC analyses of differentially methylation positions by sex in newborns.CC BY-NC-ND · PubMed Central
Figure 6. Manhattan plot showing differentially methylation positions by sex in newborns on 450K in autosomes. Sites highlighted in green are the 999 of the top 1,000 autosomal 450K hits, which were significant (FDR q <0.05) in EPIC analyses.
Figure 6. Manhattan plot showing differentially methylation positions by sex in newborns on 450K in autosomes. Sites highlighted in green are the 999 of the top 1,000 autosomal 450K hits, which were significant (FDR q <0.05) in EPIC analyses.CC BY-NC-ND · PubMed Central

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 17

  1. 10.1186/s13059-016-1066-1 · DOI · Paper page
  2. 10.1093/ije/dyx190 · DOI
  3. 10.1186/s13148-017-0333-7 · DOI
  4. 10.2217/epi-2017-0078 · DOI · Paper page
  5. 10.1038/pr.2017.112 · DOI
  6. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btu049 · DOI
  7. 10.1289/EHP595 · DOI
  8. 10.3109/713610244 · DOI
  9. 10.1289/ehp.8540 · DOI
  10. 10.4161/epi.26037 · DOI
  11. 10.1093/nar/gkw967 · DOI
  12. 10.1186/1756-8935-6-4 · DOI
  13. 10.4161/epi.23470 · DOI
  14. 10.1080/15592294.2016.1161875 · DOI
  15. 10.1093/nar/gkw1138 · DOI
  16. 10.2202/1544-6115.1027 · DOI · Paper page
  17. R Core Team, 2017, R: A language and environment for statistical computing

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 94

Metadata

Authors
Solomon, O., MacIsaac, J., Quach, H., Tindula, G., Kobor, M. S., Huen, K., Meaney, M. J., Eskenazi, B., Barcellos, L. F., & Holland, N.
Venue
Epigenetics
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2018-06-03
Volume
13
Issue
6
Pages
655-664
ISSN
  • 1559-2294
  • 1559-2308
DOI
10.1080/15592294.2018.1497386
PMC
PMC6140901
Cited by
94
References
4
Language
en
Funders
  • California Environmental Protection Agency (RD83171001, RD83273401)
  • National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (R01ES021369, R24ES028529, P01ES009605, R01ES012503, F31 ES027751)
  • National Institutes of Health (UG3OD023356)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review