From partial to whole genome imputation of SARS-CoV-2 for epidemiological surveillance. Test datasets.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
PROVIDER: PRJEB43882 | ENA |
REPOSITORIES: ENA
Dataset's files
| Action | DRS | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| AND00023_WGS.chrlist.txt.gz | Txt | |||
| AND00023_WGS.consensus.fa.gz | Other | |||
| AND00040_WGS.chrlist.txt.gz | Txt | |||
| AND00040_WGS.consensus.fa.gz | Other | |||
| AND00065_WGS.chrlist.txt.gz | Txt |
Items per page: 5 1 - 5 of 68 |
Similar Datasets
Project description:DCEG Imputation Reference Dataset
| PRJNA75845 | ENA
Project description:Missing values in proteomic data sets have real consequences on downstream data analysis and reproducibility. Although several imputation methods exist to handle missing values, no single imputation method is best suited for a diverse range of data sets, and no clear strategy exists for evaluating imputation methods for large-scale DIA-MS data sets, especially at different levels of protein quantification. To navigate through the different imputation strategies available in the literature, we have established a workflow to assess imputation methods on large-scale label-free DIA-MS data sets. We used three DIA-MS data sets with real missing values to evaluate eight different imputation methods with multiple parameters at different levels of protein quantification; dilution series data set, a small pilot data set, and a larger proteomic data set.
2021-05-07 | PXD023012 | Pride
Project description:Missing values in proteomic data sets have real consequences on downstream data analysis and reproducibility. Although several imputation methods exist to handle missing values, no single imputation method is best suited for a diverse range of data sets, and no clear strategy exists for evaluating imputation methods for large-scale DIA-MS data sets, especially at different levels of protein quantification. To navigate through the different imputation strategies available in the literature, we have established a workflow to assess imputation methods on large-scale label-free DIA-MS data sets. We used three DIA-MS data sets with real missing values to evaluate eight different imputation methods with multiple parameters at different levels of protein quantification; dilution series data set, a small pilot data set, and a larger proteomic data set.
2021-05-07 | PXD022996 | Pride
Project description:Missing values in proteomic data sets have real consequences on downstream data analysis and reproducibility. Although several imputation methods exist to handle missing values, no single imputation method is best suited for a diverse range of data sets, and no clear strategy exists for evaluating imputation methods for large-scale DIA-MS data sets, especially at different levels of protein quantification. To navigate through the different imputation strategies available in the literature, we have established a workflow to assess imputation methods on large-scale label-free DIA-MS data sets. We used three DIA-MS data sets with real missing values to evaluate eight different imputation methods with multiple parameters at different levels of protein quantification; dilution series data set, a small pilot data set, and a larger proteomic data set of clinical ovarian cancer patient samples.
2021-05-07 | PXD023040 | Pride
Project description:Imputation panel created from UK10K_COHORT_ALSPAC (EGAD00001000740) and UK10K_COHORT_TWINSUK (EGAD00001000741) datasets.
| EGAS00001000713 | EGA
Project description:The demo datasets available for MSCohort analysis. You can download to inspect their formats and practice using the software tool.
| PXD057133 |
Project description:IntroductionFor tests reporting continuous results, primary studies usually provide test performance at multiple but often different thresholds. This creates missing data when performing a meta-analysis at each threshold. A standard meta-analysis (no imputation [NI]) ignores such missing data. A single imputation (SI) approach was recently proposed to recover missing threshold results. Here, we propose a new method that performs multiple imputation of the missing threshold results using discrete combinations (MIDC).MethodsThe new MIDC method imputes missing threshold results by randomly selecting from the set of all possible discrete combinations which lie between the results for 2 known bounding thresholds. Imputed and observed results are then synthesised at each threshold. This is repeated multiple times, and the multiple pooled results at each threshold are combined using Rubin's rules to give final estimates. We compared the NI, SI, and MIDC approaches via simulation.ResultsBoth imputation methods outperform the NI method in simulations. There was generally little difference in the SI and MIDC methods, but the latter was noticeably better in terms of estimating the between-study variances and generally gave better coverage, due to slightly larger standard errors of pooled estimates. Given selective reporting of thresholds, the imputation methods also reduced bias in the summary receiver operating characteristic curve. Simulations demonstrate the imputation methods rely on an equal threshold spacing assumption. A real example is presented.ConclusionsThe SI and, in particular, MIDC methods can be used to examine the impact of missing threshold results in meta-analysis of test accuracy studies.
| S-EPMC5873416 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Data analysis is a critical part of quantitative proteomics studies in interpreting biological questions. Numerous computational tools including protein quantification, imputation, and differential expression (DE) analysis were generated in the past decade. However, searching optimized tools is still an unsolved issue. Moreover, due to the rapid development of RNA-Seq technology, a vast number of DE analysis methods are created. Applying these newly developed RNA-Seq-oriented tools to proteomics data is still a question that needs to be addressed. In order to benchmark these analysis methods, a proteomics dataset constituted the proteins derived from human, yeast, and drosophila with different ratios were generated. Based on this dataset, DE analysis tools (including array-based and RNA-Seq based), imputation algorithms, and protein quantification methods were compared and benchmarked. This study provided useful information on analyzing quantitative proteomics datasets. All the methods used in this study were integrated into Perseus which are available at https://www.maxquant.org/perseus.
2022-11-16 | PXD029891 | JPOST Repository
Project description:The integration of proteomic datasets, generated by non-cooperating laboratories using different LC-MS/MS setups can overcome limitations in statistically underpowered sample cohorts but has not been demonstrated to this day. In proteomics, differences in sample preservation and preparation strategies, chromatography and mass spectrometry approaches and the used quantification strategy distort protein abundance distributions in integrated datasets. The Removal of these technical batch effects requires setup-specific normalization and strategies that can deal with missing at random (MAR) and missing not at random (MNAR) type values at a time. Algorithms for batch effect removal, such as the ComBat-algorithm, commonly used for other omics types, disregard proteins with MNAR missing values and reduce the informational yield and the effect size for combined datasets significantly. Here, we present a strategy for data harmonization across different tissue preservation techniques, LC-MS/MS instrumentation setups and quantification approaches. To enable batch effect removal without the need for data reduction or error-prone imputation we developed an extension to the ComBat algorithm, ´ComBat HarmonizR, that performs data harmonization with appropriate handling of MAR and MNAR missing values by matrix dissection The ComBat HarmonizR based strategy enables the combined analysis of independently generated proteomic datasets for the first time. Furthermore, we found ComBat HarmonizR to be superior for removing batch effects between different Tandem Mass Tag (TMT)-plexes, compared to commonly used internal reference scaling (iRS). Due to the matrix dissection approach without the need of data imputation, the HarmonizR algorithm can be applied to any type of -omics data while assuring minimal data loss
2022-05-23 | PXD027467 | Pride