|
rdf:type |
|
|
lifeskim:mentions |
umls-concept:C0002045,
umls-concept:C0036849,
umls-concept:C0038215,
umls-concept:C0042153,
umls-concept:C0182400,
umls-concept:C0220825,
umls-concept:C0370003,
umls-concept:C0425087,
umls-concept:C0871472,
umls-concept:C1313915,
umls-concept:C1442518,
umls-concept:C1552652,
umls-concept:C1552685,
umls-concept:C1705195,
umls-concept:C1955272,
umls-concept:C2347026,
umls-concept:C2603343
|
|
pubmed:dateCreated |
2006-2-9
|
|
pubmed:abstractText |
The choice of probe set algorithms for expression summary in a GeneChip study has a great impact on subsequent gene expression data analysis. Spiked-in cRNAs with known concentration are often used to assess the relative performance of probe set algorithms. Given the fact that the spiked-in cRNAs do not represent endogenously expressed genes in experiments, it becomes increasingly important to have methods to study whether a particular probe set algorithm is more appropriate for a specific dataset, without using such external reference data.
|
|
pubmed:commentsCorrections |
http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/16403228-11134512,
http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/16403228-11532216,
http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/16403228-11742412,
http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/16403228-11753382,
http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/16403228-12149437,
http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/16403228-12368507,
http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/16403228-12538238,
http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/16403228-12582260,
http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/16403228-12734009,
http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/16403228-12925520,
http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/16403228-14751998,
http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/16403228-14960458,
http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/16403228-15117752,
http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/16403228-15693945,
http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/16403228-15711545,
http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/16403228-15722477,
http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/16403228-16085708,
http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/16403228-7569999,
http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/commentcorrection/16403228-9634850
|
|
pubmed:language |
eng
|
|
pubmed:journal |
|
|
pubmed:citationSubset |
IM
|
|
pubmed:chemical |
|
|
pubmed:status |
MEDLINE
|
|
pubmed:issn |
1471-2105
|
|
pubmed:author |
|
|
pubmed:issnType |
Electronic
|
|
pubmed:volume |
7
|
|
pubmed:owner |
NLM
|
|
pubmed:authorsComplete |
Y
|
|
pubmed:pagination |
12
|
|
pubmed:dateRevised |
2009-11-18
|
|
pubmed:meshHeading |
pubmed-meshheading:16403228-Algorithms,
pubmed-meshheading:16403228-DNA Probes,
pubmed-meshheading:16403228-Data Interpretation, Statistical,
pubmed-meshheading:16403228-Gene Expression Profiling,
pubmed-meshheading:16403228-Models, Genetic,
pubmed-meshheading:16403228-Models, Statistical,
pubmed-meshheading:16403228-Oligonucleotide Array Sequence Analysis,
pubmed-meshheading:16403228-Reproducibility of Results,
pubmed-meshheading:16403228-Sample Size,
pubmed-meshheading:16403228-Sensitivity and Specificity,
pubmed-meshheading:16403228-Software,
pubmed-meshheading:16403228-Software Validation
|
|
pubmed:year |
2006
|
|
pubmed:articleTitle |
Utilization of two sample t-test statistics from redundant probe sets to evaluate different probe set algorithms in GeneChip studies.
|
|
pubmed:affiliation |
Center for Computational Research, Department of Biostatistics, University at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY 14260, USA. zihuahu@ccr.buffalo.edu
|
|
pubmed:publicationType |
Journal Article,
Evaluation Studies,
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
|
