The largest database of trusted experimental protocols

Quickcal

Manufactured by GraphPad
Sourced in United States

QuickCals is a software tool that provides quick and accurate calculation capabilities for various scientific and laboratory applications. It offers a range of mathematical functions and unit conversions to assist researchers and technicians in performing essential calculations efficiently.

Automatically generated - may contain errors

21 protocols using quickcal

1

Comprehensive Pharmacokinetic Analysis

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
GraphPad Prism (version 8) was used for statistical data analysis. Unpaired t-test or Mann-Whitney non-parametric tests were used to determine the significance in gene expression assays. Survival data was analyzed using Kaplan Meier survival analysis and Gehan-Breslow-Wilcoxin test was used to determine significance. Significance was calculated at p<0.05 and the Grubb’s test on GraphPad QuickCals was used to remove any outliers. A 2-way ANOVA was used to test the effect of vitamin D status or time on DEX plasma levels. Further, Sidak’s multiple comparison test was used to analyze the significance of each effect. For the DEX oral gavage PK study, we used a population modeling approach that is more appropriate for individual animals with variable and sparse repeated serial sampling. We tested sex and VD3 covariates on the parameter CL/F, that is mathematically proportional to AUCinf, as a surrogate for Cmax, these covariates were tested on the volume of distribution parameter V1/F for DEX. Plasma concentration-time (Ct) data in ng/mL for dasatinib were grouped by individual mouse, Vitamin D status, sex, and age, and were analyzed using nonlinear mixed effect (NLME) modeling as implemented in Monolix version 2018R1 (Lixoft SAS, Antony, France). Additionally, Wald test P values were outputted for each covariate effect by the Monolix software.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
2

Statistical Analysis of Experimental Data

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The mean s.d. was calculated using Microsoft Excel. For statistical analysis, an unpaired ‘t’ test was performed to compare the means of two experimental groups using the online software GraphPad Quick Cals, available at http://www.graphpad.com/quickcals/ttest.cfm. The error bars represent s.e.m. [(standard deviation/√n); n=sample size]. Statistical significance is shown with asterisks: *P≤0.05; **P≤0.001; ***P≤0.0001; N.S., not significant. To arrive at the statistically significant sample size for each experiment, we performed power analysis using a previously described model (Cohen, 1988 ), as incorporated in the G*power 3.1 (Faul et al., 2009 (link)) software using the following formula:
where, s.d., standard deviation; Zα/2 and Zβ are type 1 and 2 errors, respectively; d=effect size=difference between mean values. In the worst possible scenarios, we kept the type 1 error to 7% and type 2 error to 80% so that the power was always above 85%.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
3

Statistical Analysis of Biological Data

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
All other results were analyzed using a two-tailed Student’s paired t test, using GraphPad QuickCals software and p<0.05 was considered statistically significant.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
4

Genetic Variants and Dengue Vascular Permeability

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The genotype and allele frequencies of each variant were determined. Hardy–Weinberg Equilibrium (HWE) was performed to compute the deviation of the variants tested. Fisher’s exact test was used to determine the significance of the difference in genotype distributions.
Chi-square test with Yates’ correction and/or Fisher’s exact test (when applicable) was performed on the polymorphic variants for association with vascular permeability of dengue using GraphPad QuickCals (http://graphpad.com/quickcalcs/contingency1/). Two-sided P values were calculated. Odds ratio (OR) and a Cornfield’s 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were calculated.
Analyses of haplotypes were carried out using HAPLOVIEW [14] (link). Haplotype blocks were constructed according to definition by Gabriel et al. [16] (link). Haplotype blocks and the haplotype frequencies were estimated. Haplotype association tests were performed using chi square test in HAPLOVIEW. Permutation test (1000×) was performed to examine the association significance.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
5

Statistical Analysis of Experimental Data

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Results were analyzed using a two-tailed Student's unpaired t test, using GraphPad QuickCals software and p<0.05 was considered statistically significant.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
6

Diagnostic Accuracy Evaluation of Leishmania Antigens

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The lower limit of positivity (cut-off) for rPeroxidoxin and SLbA was established for optimal sensitivity and specificity using the Receiver Operator Curve (ROC curve). The cut-off was chosen based on the point that provides the maximum of the sum of the sensitivity and specificity [25] (link). The performance of each test was evaluated according to the sensitivity (Se), specificity (Sp), positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), area under the curve (AUC) and accuracy (AC). The degree of agreement between the ELISA assays using rPeroxidoxin, SLbA or the EIE-LVC kit with a parasitological test (biopsy, aspirate or PCR) was determined by the Kappa index (k) values with 95% confidence intervals and interpreted according to the following Fleiss scale: 0.00–0.20, poor; 0.21–0.40, fair; 0.41–0.60, moderate; 0.61–0.80, good; 0.81–0.99, very good; and 1.00, perfect [26] (link). The one-sample Kolmogorov-Smirnoff test was used to determine whether a variable was normally distributed. For depletion assays, significant differences were detected using unpaired T tests between depleted and undepleted assays. The differences were considered statistically significant at p<0.05. All of the statistical analyses were performed using GraphPad Prism (version 5.0) and GraphPad QuickCals (http://www.graphpad.com/quickcalcs/).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
7

Analyzing Significance of Experimental Data

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Results were analyzed using a two-tailed Student’s unpaired t test, using GraphPad QuickCals software (unless indicated otherwise) and *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01 and ***p < 0.001 were considered statistically significant.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
8

Antifungal Susceptibility Analysis

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Data were calculated as MIC range, geometric mean MIC (GM MIC), MIC50, and MIC90 in Microsoft Excel version 2019. For geometric means, isolates with MIC’s designated as “equal to or greater than” were given the value as equal to the number. A two-tailed Fisher’s exact test and a two-tailed unpaired t test implemented in GraphPad QuickCals (https://www.graphpad.com/quickcalcs/) were applied to determine the correlation analysis, including the environmental or clinical sample sources. The Mann–Whitney U-test or Kruskal–Wallis test with Dunn’s multiple comparisons test was implemented in GraphPad Prism version 8.0.2 (GraphPad Software, California, USA) to examine the in vitro antifungal susceptibility testing results. A value of p < 0.05 was considered significant.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
9

Zinc Supplementation for ALRI in Children

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
After enrolment, the children were randomized to receive zinc supplementation or placebo by an independent person who was not involved in the study. The randomization list was generated by using a computer program (GraphPad QuickCals, La Jolla, CA, USA), in a 1:1 ratio and in a block size of 2. An independent person prepared the randomization schedule and oversaw the packaging and labeling process to ensure the blinding. All investigators, children, parents, and guardians were blinded throughout the study. The randomization codes were opened after the completion of the study.
The children in the treatment group received chelated zinc as zinc bis-glycinate (15 mg elemental zinc) twice a day until their discharge from the hospital, or up to a maximum of 7 days. Children in the control group received an ORS-based placebo, with similar appearance and taste to zinc powder. Both the zinc and placebo were manufactured and supplied by Qualimed (Bangkok, Thailand) as a powder in an identical single- dose sachet. The contents of the sachet were dissolved in a glass of water before administration. The treatment of ALRI, as well as the observation and the discharge decisions, were made by the attending physicians, who were not involved in the implementation phase of the study.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
10

Upper Canine Color Difference Analysis

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The sample size was calculated based on the upper canines’ color difference (ΔE00 — a primary outcome) recorded in a previously performed pilot study with 30 randomized participants (GraphPad QuickCals, http://www.graphpad.com/quickcalcs/randomize1.cfm), using the G*Power 3.1 software (Heinrich-Heine-Universität, Düsseldorf, Germany). The size effect was calculated based on the perceptibility threshold ΔE00 = 0.8 with a standard deviation of 0.81 [57 (link), 58 (link)]. Considering an F test (one-way ANOVA) with a significance level of 5% and a power of 80%, a minimum of 20 participants per group was required. To offset a possible attrition bias, 50% was added to each group, resulting in 30 patients’ samples (a total of 90 patients).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand

About PubCompare

Our mission is to provide scientists with the largest repository of trustworthy protocols and intelligent analytical tools, thereby offering them extensive information to design robust protocols aimed at minimizing the risk of failures.

We believe that the most crucial aspect is to grant scientists access to a wide range of reliable sources and new useful tools that surpass human capabilities.

However, we trust in allowing scientists to determine how to construct their own protocols based on this information, as they are the experts in their field.

Ready to get started?

Sign up for free.
Registration takes 20 seconds.
Available from any computer
No download required

Sign up now

Revolutionizing how scientists
search and build protocols!