Cargando…
Quantitative evaluations of variations using the population mean as a baseline for bioinformatics interpretation
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study were to establish a model of quantitative evaluation that uses the population mean as a baseline of variations and describe variations derived from different types and systems using new concepts. METHODS: The observed datasets, including measurement data and rela...
Autor principal: | |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
PeerJ Inc.
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9969859/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36860762 http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.14955 |
_version_ | 1784897811070844928 |
---|---|
author | Hui, Liu |
author_facet | Hui, Liu |
author_sort | Hui, Liu |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study were to establish a model of quantitative evaluation that uses the population mean as a baseline of variations and describe variations derived from different types and systems using new concepts. METHODS: The observed datasets, including measurement data and relative data, were transformed to 0–1.0 using the population mean. Datasets derived from different types (same category of dataset, different categories of datasets, and datasets with the same baseline) were transformed using different methods. The ‘middle compared index’ (MCI) was used to describe the change in magnitude as follows: [a/(a+b)+(1−b)/(2−a−b)−1](1.7), where ‘a’ represents the number after the magnitude change and ‘b’ represents the number before the magnitude change. Actual data were used to observe the MCI’s ability to evaluate variations quantitatively. RESULTS: When the value before the magnitude change was equal to that after the magnitude change, the MCI was equal to 0; when the value before the magnitude change was equal to 0 and that after the magnitude change was equal to 1, the MCI was equal to 1. This implies the MCI is valid. When the value before the magnitude change was 0 and that after the magnitude change was 0.5, or when the value before the magnitude change was 0.5 and that after the magnitude change was 1.0, each MCI was approximately equal to 0.5. The values derived from the absolute, ratio, and MCI methods were different, indicating that the MCI is an independent index. CONCLUSION: The MCI perfectly performs as an evaluation model using the population mean as the baseline, and it may be more a reasonable index than the ratio or absolute methods. The MCI increases our understanding of quantitative variations in evaluation measures of association using new concepts. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9969859 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | PeerJ Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-99698592023-02-28 Quantitative evaluations of variations using the population mean as a baseline for bioinformatics interpretation Hui, Liu PeerJ Biochemistry OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study were to establish a model of quantitative evaluation that uses the population mean as a baseline of variations and describe variations derived from different types and systems using new concepts. METHODS: The observed datasets, including measurement data and relative data, were transformed to 0–1.0 using the population mean. Datasets derived from different types (same category of dataset, different categories of datasets, and datasets with the same baseline) were transformed using different methods. The ‘middle compared index’ (MCI) was used to describe the change in magnitude as follows: [a/(a+b)+(1−b)/(2−a−b)−1](1.7), where ‘a’ represents the number after the magnitude change and ‘b’ represents the number before the magnitude change. Actual data were used to observe the MCI’s ability to evaluate variations quantitatively. RESULTS: When the value before the magnitude change was equal to that after the magnitude change, the MCI was equal to 0; when the value before the magnitude change was equal to 0 and that after the magnitude change was equal to 1, the MCI was equal to 1. This implies the MCI is valid. When the value before the magnitude change was 0 and that after the magnitude change was 0.5, or when the value before the magnitude change was 0.5 and that after the magnitude change was 1.0, each MCI was approximately equal to 0.5. The values derived from the absolute, ratio, and MCI methods were different, indicating that the MCI is an independent index. CONCLUSION: The MCI perfectly performs as an evaluation model using the population mean as the baseline, and it may be more a reasonable index than the ratio or absolute methods. The MCI increases our understanding of quantitative variations in evaluation measures of association using new concepts. PeerJ Inc. 2023-02-24 /pmc/articles/PMC9969859/ /pubmed/36860762 http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.14955 Text en © 2023 Hui https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, reproduction and adaptation in any medium and for any purpose provided that it is properly attributed. For attribution, the original author(s), title, publication source (PeerJ) and either DOI or URL of the article must be cited. |
spellingShingle | Biochemistry Hui, Liu Quantitative evaluations of variations using the population mean as a baseline for bioinformatics interpretation |
title | Quantitative evaluations of variations using the population mean as a baseline for bioinformatics interpretation |
title_full | Quantitative evaluations of variations using the population mean as a baseline for bioinformatics interpretation |
title_fullStr | Quantitative evaluations of variations using the population mean as a baseline for bioinformatics interpretation |
title_full_unstemmed | Quantitative evaluations of variations using the population mean as a baseline for bioinformatics interpretation |
title_short | Quantitative evaluations of variations using the population mean as a baseline for bioinformatics interpretation |
title_sort | quantitative evaluations of variations using the population mean as a baseline for bioinformatics interpretation |
topic | Biochemistry |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9969859/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36860762 http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.14955 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT huiliu quantitativeevaluationsofvariationsusingthepopulationmeanasabaselineforbioinformaticsinterpretation |