BME100 f2014:Group20 L6

From OpenWetWare
Jump to navigationJump to search
BME 100 Fall 2014 Home
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
Wiki Editing Help


Bjorn Houman
Ryan Giudice
Name: Karthik Nambiar
[[Image:BME103student.jpg|100px|thumb|Jeremy Ellis]
Name: student
Connor Seiferth


Bayesian Statistics

Overview of the Original Diagnosis System

When testing patients for the disease-associated SNP, BME 100 split the labor up throughout the groups. With 34 teams of 6 students, 68 patients were able to be tested. This is a good division of labor in that while each group only needed to test two patients, the entire group was able to test 68. This helps on the larger scale. Many things were done to help prevent error. By receiving three replicate DNA samples from the two patients, it ensured multiple trials and a higher chance of success. After all the tests were conducted, the results yielded a total positive result of 30, and a total negative result of 24. Of these, eight were inconclusive, and for six of them there was no test.

What Bayes Statistics Imply about This Diagnostic Approach

Bayes Values for Calculations 1 and 2

The Bayes value for both one and two seem to be reliable in concluding that there is a good chance it is accurate in determining that a person has the disease SNP, because of the values being closer to 1.00. Some error could have come from a few sources. First off, the solution could have possibly been exposed for too long. Second, there is a possibility the ImageJ software was read incorrectly, or was maybe used incorrectly. Finally, there is a chance that the solutions may have been prepared incorrectly, causing wrong results.

Bayes Values for Calculations 3 and 4

Based on the Bayes value for calculations 3 and 4, it would seem that these values are not as accurate in determining if the person has the disease SNP, because of the values being further from 1.00.

Computer-Aided Design


Despite having the issue of the site going down for maintenance, the following is a summary of the TinkerCAD tool. This tool was used in place of a much more advanced CAD software such as Autodesk Inventor / Solidworks in order to introduce the freshman to digital design. It's use of pre-made shapes and easy dimensioning is helpful for those who are unfamiliar with drawing and extruding a shape. Our Design

Our group found that the OpenPCR design was functional and, for the most part, efficient however its major flaw was its weight. Therefore we proposed to mill holes into it, coring out all the unnecessary material in the sides and the corners and using smaller and more efficient electronics to take up less space.

Feature 2: Consumables Kit

The consumables will come in a plastic case with clasps to keep it closed. Everything will be organized and wrapped in plastic separately, to ensure it will remain organized.

The most important part of this organization is the separation by plastic parts in order to ensure that everything remains organized.

Feature 3: Hardware - PCR Machine & Fluorimeter

The PCR thermocycler and the fluorimeter will be individually packaged within the box. Having them remain separated will leave the less prone to damage.

The improved PCR machine would include internet connectivity. This way progress on the PCR could be tracked on an internet enabled device. The user would be able to know when an error has occurred so time wouldn't be wasted waiting for PCR to finish while an error has actually occurred. Also, the user would be able to check the results anytime, anywhere once the process has been completed.