Corpus 1,272 assessed · 1,173 scored · 643 reproduced ≥75 · 168 flagged ·∅ 74.1/100
← Dataset search

GSE36642

GEO first seen 2016

Neonatal DNA methylation profile in humans is specified by a complex interplay between intrauterine environmental/ genetic factors subject to tissue-specific influence

Organism
Homo sapiens
Samples
123
Type
Methylation profiling by arr...
Submitted
2012-03-20

Comparison between groups of monozygotic (MZ) and dizygotic (DZ) twins enables an estimation of the relative contribution of genetic, shared and non-shared environmental factors to phenotypic variability. Using DNA methylation profiling of ~20,000 CpG sites as a phenotype, we have examined discordance levels in multiple tissues in neonatal twins. MZ twins exhibit a wide range of within-pair differences at birth, but show discordance levels generally lower than DZ pairs. Within-pair methylation d...

Provenance — who produced it, who reused it

Linked to 4 papers in the literature. Roles are inferred factual signals (who deposited the data vs who reused it), with counts — never a judgement about any author.

Deposited / produced by
Lavinia GordonEric J JooJoseph E PowellMiina OllikainenBoris NovakovicXin LiRoberta AndronikosMark N CruickshankKaren N ConneelyAlicia K SmithReid S AlischRuth MorleyJohn CarlinPeter M VisscherJeffery M CraigRichard Saffery
Reused by

2 further papers cite this accession but reuse could not be confirmed.

Deep data QC

metadata only · no data-level QC for this type

Standardized, field-standard QC computed by touching the data — every metric states how it was obtained

No quantitative QC rubric exists for this data type yet, so it is deliberately left unscored — this is an honest "not applicable", not a poor rating.

QC cost 2 s compute

measured = computed from the data · extrapolated/reported = derived or from the repository · dq-1.0 · provisional — verify independently

Scientific quality

Based on hands-on reproduction of the papers that use this dataset. A reproducible paper that stands on this data is positive evidence; a flagged one is a prompt to look closer — never a verdict on the dataset itself without the evidence.

1 studies use it 1 reproduced mean score 90