Table 1.
General guidelines for WSH scores
| Score | Concept | Strengths | Drawbacks | Application scenario |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PDR | Locally disordered methylation | Detects DNAm erosion; CpG-wise score; Fast computation | Simulated heterogeneity not detected; Dependency on read length and CpG density | Addressing locally disordered DNA methylation in large cancer datasets |
| MHL | Methylation haplotypes | CpG-wise score; Robust to technical setup | Simulated heterogeneity not detected; Slow computation | Linking genetically detected haplotypes to DNA methylation haplotypes |
| Epipoly | Variance among the reads | Simulated heterogeneity detected; Robust to technical setup | no CpG-wise score; Few regions captured | Segmentation into highly and lowly variably methylated regions for large bisulfite sequencing datasets |
| Entropy | Variance among the reads | Simulated heterogeneity detected; Robust to technical setup | no CpG-wise score; Few regions captured | Segmentation into highly and lowly variably methylated regions for large bisulfite sequencing datasets |
| FDRP | Variance among the reads | Simulated heterogeneity detected CpG-wise score | Dependency on coverage, read length and CpG density; Rather slow computation | Linking CpG-wise methylation values to epigenetic heterogeneity in large bisulfite sequencing datasets |
| qFDRP | Variance among the reads | Simulated heterogeneity detected; Robust to technical setup; CpG-wise score | Rather slow computation | Linking CpG-wise methylation values to epigenetic heterogeneity in large bisulfite sequencing datasets |