A Comparison of Software Packages Available for DINA Model Estimation
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Sen S
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7003186 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Apr
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:To facilitate a more widespread use of volumetric tumor segmentation in clinical studies, there is an urgent need for reliable, user-friendly segmentation software. The aim of this study was therefore to compare three different software packages for semi-automatic brain tumor segmentation of glioblastoma; namely BrainVoyagerTM QX, ITK-Snap and 3D Slicer, and to make data available for future reference. Pre-operative, contrast enhanced T1-weighted 1.5 or 3 Tesla Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) scans were obtained in 20 consecutive patients who underwent surgery for glioblastoma. MRI scans were segmented twice in each software package by two investigators. Intra-rater, inter-rater and between-software agreement was compared by using differences of means with 95% limits of agreement (LoA), Dice's similarity coefficients (DSC) and Hausdorff distance (HD). Time expenditure of segmentations was measured using a stopwatch. Eighteen tumors were included in the analyses. Inter-rater agreement was highest for BrainVoyager with difference of means of 0.19 mL and 95% LoA from -2.42 mL to 2.81 mL. Between-software agreement and 95% LoA were very similar for the different software packages. Intra-rater, inter-rater and between-software DSC were ? 0.93 in all analyses. Time expenditure was approximately 41 min per segmentation in BrainVoyager, and 18 min per segmentation in both 3D Slicer and ITK-Snap. Our main findings were that there is a high agreement within and between the software packages in terms of small intra-rater, inter-rater and between-software differences of means and high Dice's similarity coefficients. Time expenditure was highest for BrainVoyager, but all software packages were relatively time-consuming, which may limit usability in an everyday clinical setting.
| S-EPMC5079567 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAn appropriate normalization strategy is crucial for data analysis from real time reverse transcription polymerase chain reactions (RT-qPCR). It is widely supported to identify and validate stable reference genes, since no single biological gene is stably expressed between cell types or within cells under different conditions. Different algorithms exist to validate optimal reference genes for normalization. Applying human cells, we here compare the three main methods to the online available RefFinder tool that integrates these algorithms along with R-based software packages which include the NormFinder and GeNorm algorithms.Results14 candidate reference genes were assessed by RT-qPCR in two sample sets, i.e. a set of samples of human testicular tissue containing carcinoma in situ (CIS), and a set of samples from the human adult Sertoli cell line (FS1) either cultured alone or in co-culture with the seminoma like cell line (TCam-2) or with equine bone marrow derived mesenchymal stem cells (eBM-MSC). Expression stabilities of the reference genes were evaluated using geNorm, NormFinder, and BestKeeper. Similar results were obtained by the three approaches for the most and least stably expressed genes. The R-based packages NormqPCR, SLqPCR and the NormFinder for R script gave identical gene rankings. Interestingly, different outputs were obtained between the original software packages and the RefFinder tool, which is based on raw Cq values for input. When the raw data were reanalysed assuming 100% efficiency for all genes, then the outputs of the original software packages were similar to the RefFinder software, indicating that RefFinder outputs may be biased because PCR efficiencies are not taken into account.ConclusionsThis report shows that assay efficiency is an important parameter for reference gene validation. New software tools that incorporate these algorithms should be carefully validated prior to use.
| S-EPMC4380439 | biostudies-literature
Project description:With the increasing demanding for precision of test feedback, cognitive diagnosis models have attracted more and more attention to fine classify students whether has mastered some skills. The purpose of this paper is to propose a highly effective Pólya-Gamma Gibbs sampling algorithm (Polson et al., 2013) based on auxiliary variables to estimate the deterministic inputs, noisy "and" gate model (DINA) model that have been widely used in cognitive diagnosis study. The new algorithm avoids the Metropolis-Hastings algorithm boring adjustment the turning parameters to achieve an appropriate acceptance probability. Four simulation studies are conducted and a detailed analysis of fraction subtraction data is carried out to further illustrate the proposed methodology.
| S-EPMC7076190 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Purpose: Automated postprocessing packages have been developed for managing acute ischemic stroke (AIS). These packages identify ischemic core and penumbra using either computed tomographic perfusion imaging (CTP) data or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) data. Measurements of abnormal tissues and treatment decisions derived from different vendors can vary. The purpose of this study is to investigate the agreement of volumetric and decision-making outcomes derived from two software packages. Methods: A total of 594 AIS patients (174 underwent CTP and 420 underwent MRI) were included. Imaging data were accordingly postprocessed by two software packages: RAPID and RealNow. Volumetric outputs were compared between packages by performing intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), Wilcoxon paired test and Bland–Altman analysis. Concordance of selecting patients eligible for mechanical thrombectomy (MT) was assessed based on neuroimaging criteria proposed in DEFUSE3. Results: In the group with CTP data, mean ischemic core volume (ICV)/penumbral volume (PV) was 14.9/81.1 mL via RAPID and 12.6/83.2 mL via RealNow. Meanwhile, in the MRI group, mean ICV/PV were 52.4/68.4 mL and 48.9/61.6 mL via RAPID and RealNow, respectively. Reliability, which was measured by ICC of ICV and PV in CTP and MRI groups, ranged from 0.87 to 0.99. The bias remained small between measurements (CTP ICV: 0.89 mL, CTP PV: −2 mL, MRI ICV: 3.5 mL and MRI PV: 6.8 mL). In comparison with CTP ICV with follow-up DWI, the ICC was 0.92 and 0.94 for RAPID and Realnow, respectively. The bias remained small between CTP ICV and follow-up DWI measurements (Rapid: −4.65 mL, RealNow: −3.65 mL). Wilcoxon paired test showed no significant difference between measurements. The results of patient triage were concordant in 159/174 cases (91%, ICC: 0.90) for CTP and 400/420 cases (95%, ICC: 0.93) for MRI. Conclusion: The CTP ICV derived from RealNow was more accurate than RAPID. The similarity in volumetric measurement between packages did not necessarily relate to equivalent patient triage. In this study, RealNow showed excellent agreement with RAPID in measuring ICV and PV as well as patient triage.
| S-EPMC9406974 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Brain age prediction algorithms using structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) aim to assess the biological age of the human brain. The difference between a person's chronological age and the estimated brain age is thought to reflect deviations from a normal aging trajectory, indicating a slower or accelerated biological aging process. Several pre-trained software packages for predicting brain age are publicly available. In this study, we perform a comparison of such packages with respect to (1) predictive accuracy, (2) test-retest reliability, and (3) the ability to track age progression over time. We evaluated the six brain age prediction packages: brainageR, DeepBrainNet, brainage, ENIGMA, pyment, and mccqrnn. The accuracy and test-retest reliability were assessed on MRI data from 372 healthy people aged between 18.4 and 86.2 years (mean 38.7 ± 17.5 years). All packages showed significant correlations between predicted brain age and chronological age (r = 0.66-0.97, p < 0.001), with pyment displaying the strongest correlation. The mean absolute error was between 3.56 (pyment) and 9.54 years (ENIGMA). brainageR, pyment, and mccqrnn were superior in terms of reliability (ICC values between 0.94-0.98), as well as predicting age progression over a longer time span. Of the six packages, pyment and brainageR consistently showed the highest accuracy and test-retest reliability.
| S-EPMC10619370 | biostudies-literature
Project description:RNA-sequencing (RNA-seq) has rapidly become a popular tool to characterize transcriptomes. A fundamental research problem in many RNA-seq studies is the identification of reliable molecular markers that show differential expression between distinct sample groups. Together with the growing popularity of RNA-seq, a number of data analysis methods and pipelines have already been developed for this task. Currently, however, there is no clear consensus about the best practices yet, which makes the choice of an appropriate method a daunting task especially for a basic user without a strong statistical or computational background. To assist the choice, we perform here a systematic comparison of eight widely used software packages and pipelines for detecting differential expression between sample groups in a practical research setting and provide general guidelines for choosing a robust pipeline. In general, our results demonstrate how the data analysis tool utilized can markedly affect the outcome of the data analysis, highlighting the importance of this choice.
| S-EPMC4293378 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Accurate and comprehensive annotation of microprotein-coding small open reading frames (smORFs) is critical to our understanding of normal physiology and disease. Empirical identification of translated smORFs is carried out primarily using ribosome profiling (Ribo-seq). While effective, published Ribo-seq datasets can vary drastically in quality and different analysis tools are frequently employed. Here, we examine the impact of these factors on identifying translated smORFs. We compared five commonly used software tools that assess ORF translation from Ribo-seq (RibORFv0.1, RibORFv1.0, RiboCode, ORFquant, and Ribo-TISH), and found surprisingly low agreement across all tools. Only ~2% of smORFs were called translated by all five tools and ~15% by three or more tools when assessing the same high-resolution Ribo-seq dataset. For larger annotated genes, the same analysis showed ~72% agreement across all five tools. We also found that some tools are strongly biased against low-resolution Ribo-seq data, while others are more tolerant. Analyzing Ribo-seq coverage as a proxy for translation levels revealed that highly translated smORFs are more likely to be detected by more than one tool. Together these results support employing multiple tools to identify the most confident microprotein-coding smORFs, and choosing the tools based on the quality of the dataset and planned downstream characterization experiments of predicted smORFs.
| S-EPMC10793472 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Time-lapse microscopy offers a powerful approach for analyzing cellular activity. In particular, this technique is valuable for assessing the behavior of bacterial populations, which can exhibit growth and intercellular interactions in a monolayer. Such time-lapse imaging typically generates large quantities of data, limiting the options for manual investigation. Several image-processing software packages have been developed to facilitate analysis. It can thus be a challenge to identify the software package best suited to a particular research goal. Here, we compare four software packages that support the analysis of 2D time-lapse images of cellular populations: CellProfiler, SuperSegger-Omnipose, DeLTA, and FAST. We compare their performance against benchmarked results on time-lapse observations of Escherichia coli populations. Performance varies across the packages, with each of the four outperforming the others in at least one aspect of the analysis. Not surprisingly, the packages that have been in development for longer showed the strongest performance. We found that deep learning-based approaches to object segmentation outperformed traditional approaches, but the opposite was true for frame-to-frame object tracking. We offer these comparisons, together with insight into usability, computational efficiency, and feature availability, as a guide to researchers seeking image-processing solutions.ImportanceTime-lapse microscopy provides a detailed window into the world of bacterial behavior. However, the vast amount of data produced by these techniques is difficult to analyze manually. We have analyzed four software tools designed to process such data and compared their performance, using populations of commonly studied bacterial species as our test subjects. Our findings offer a roadmap to scientists, helping them choose the right tool for their research. This comparison bridges a gap between microbiology and computational analysis, streamlining research efforts.
| S-EPMC11302142 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-BSST765 | biostudies-other
Project description: Not available
| S-BSST797 | biostudies-other