BME100 f2014:Group30 L6: Difference between revisions

From OpenWetWare
Jump to navigationJump to search
Line 30: Line 30:
'''Overview of the Original Diagnosis System'''
'''Overview of the Original Diagnosis System'''
<!-- Instructions: Write a medium-length summary (~10 - 20 sentences) of how BME100 tested patients for the disease-associated SNP. Describe (A) the division of labor (e.g., 34 teams of 6 students each diagnosed 68 patients total...), (B) things that were done to prevent error, such as the number of replicates per patient, PCR controls, ImageJ calibration controls, and the number of drop images that were used for the ImageJ calculations (per unique PCR sample), and (C) the class's final data from the BME100_fa2014_PCRResults spreadsheet (successful conclusions, inconclusive results, blank data). -->
<!-- Instructions: Write a medium-length summary (~10 - 20 sentences) of how BME100 tested patients for the disease-associated SNP. Describe (A) the division of labor (e.g., 34 teams of 6 students each diagnosed 68 patients total...), (B) things that were done to prevent error, such as the number of replicates per patient, PCR controls, ImageJ calibration controls, and the number of drop images that were used for the ImageJ calculations (per unique PCR sample), and (C) the class's final data from the BME100_fa2014_PCRResults spreadsheet (successful conclusions, inconclusive results, blank data). -->
In the PCR lab experiment, the DNA of 68 patients total was amplified and analyzed for a specific disease indicator in order to predict the group's probability of disease detection. To divide the work for this experiment, 34 groups of 6 people each tested 2 patients to determine the likelihood that either patient would contract the disease.
As with any experiment, steps were taken to prevent error. For example, 3 total replicates were tested for each patient as a way to minimize the likelihood that the patient will be misdiagnosed. In addition, the PCR mix had positive and negative control solutions, which helped to make sure that the PCR machines and fluorimeters produced the expected results for the known positive and negative solutions. Regarding the Image J processing, calibration controls of positive and negative solutions were utilized to prevent error in the sense that they provided a baseline for what was supposed to happen in patient samples with negative and positive test results. In other words, the positive control showed the SYBR green, which indicated that the PCR and fluorimeter machines worked to produce expected, controlled results, and it also indicates that other patient samples with the same green color test positive. To increase the accuracy of the Image J processing values, 3 drop images were taken per PCR sample and averaged together.
Although the class's final data contained a majority of successful conclusions, there were discrepancies within the data collection that affected the overall Bayesian calculations for the specificity and sensitivity that a patient has a disease. For example, 8 out of the 68 patient results were inconclusive, which means that the calculated Bayesian probability statistics were higher or lower than the actual probability depending on whether the inconclusive results should have been positive or negative. Blank data was also discrepancy within the data collection, as the 6 blank conclusions decreased the total PCR conclusions that were used to calculate Bayesian probabilities. Since the total number of conclusions was decreased due to the number of blank conclusions, the statistics were higher than what they should have been if there had been 68 total conclusions. For example, if 20 out 68 people had a positive conclusion, there would be a higher probability of a positive test conclusion than if 20 out of 62 people had a positive test conclusion. Measures were taken to obtain the most accurate data collection, but there are things like inconclusive and blank test results that can still affect the data analysis.





Revision as of 21:53, 24 November 2014

BME 100 Fall 2014 Home
People
Lab Write-Up 1 | Lab Write-Up 2 | Lab Write-Up 3
Lab Write-Up 4 | Lab Write-Up 5 | Lab Write-Up 6
Course Logistics For Instructors
Photos
Wiki Editing Help


OUR COMPANY

Name: Megan Wieser
Name: student
Name: student
Name: student
Name: student
Name: student


LAB 6 WRITE-UP

Bayesian Statistics

Overview of the Original Diagnosis System

In the PCR lab experiment, the DNA of 68 patients total was amplified and analyzed for a specific disease indicator in order to predict the group's probability of disease detection. To divide the work for this experiment, 34 groups of 6 people each tested 2 patients to determine the likelihood that either patient would contract the disease.

As with any experiment, steps were taken to prevent error. For example, 3 total replicates were tested for each patient as a way to minimize the likelihood that the patient will be misdiagnosed. In addition, the PCR mix had positive and negative control solutions, which helped to make sure that the PCR machines and fluorimeters produced the expected results for the known positive and negative solutions. Regarding the Image J processing, calibration controls of positive and negative solutions were utilized to prevent error in the sense that they provided a baseline for what was supposed to happen in patient samples with negative and positive test results. In other words, the positive control showed the SYBR green, which indicated that the PCR and fluorimeter machines worked to produce expected, controlled results, and it also indicates that other patient samples with the same green color test positive. To increase the accuracy of the Image J processing values, 3 drop images were taken per PCR sample and averaged together.

Although the class's final data contained a majority of successful conclusions, there were discrepancies within the data collection that affected the overall Bayesian calculations for the specificity and sensitivity that a patient has a disease. For example, 8 out of the 68 patient results were inconclusive, which means that the calculated Bayesian probability statistics were higher or lower than the actual probability depending on whether the inconclusive results should have been positive or negative. Blank data was also discrepancy within the data collection, as the 6 blank conclusions decreased the total PCR conclusions that were used to calculate Bayesian probabilities. Since the total number of conclusions was decreased due to the number of blank conclusions, the statistics were higher than what they should have been if there had been 68 total conclusions. For example, if 20 out 68 people had a positive conclusion, there would be a higher probability of a positive test conclusion than if 20 out of 62 people had a positive test conclusion. Measures were taken to obtain the most accurate data collection, but there are things like inconclusive and blank test results that can still affect the data analysis.


What Bayes Statistics Imply about This Diagnostic Approach


Computer-Aided Design

TinkerCAD


Our Design





Feature 1: Consumables Kit

Feature 2: Hardware - PCR Machine & Fluorimeter