The largest database of trusted experimental protocols

Prism vs 7

Manufactured by GraphPad
Sourced in United States

GraphPad Prism 7 is a data analysis and graphing software designed for researchers and scientists. It provides tools for data organization, analysis, and visualization. Prism 7 supports a wide range of data types and statistical methods, allowing users to explore and interpret their findings effectively.

Automatically generated - may contain errors

Lab products found in correlation

7 protocols using prism vs 7

1

Evaluating Drug Combination Synergy

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Statistical analysis was performed with GraphPad Prism vs7. Values are shown as mean of all replicates ± standard error of the mean (S.E.M) in which the number of independent experiments was equal or more than three. Values were analyzed by ANOVA with Dunnett’s post-test or by students’ t-test. A p value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Where the number of independent experiments was less than three, values shown are mean ± range.
To study the effect of drug combination on cells toxicity or viability, excess over bliss (EOB) analysis was performed to determine the drug combination effects at each combination dose according to Liu et al. [29 (link)]. An EOB score > 1 is considered synergism, a score of >0 but <1 is considered independent/additive while a score ˂ 0 is considered antagonism.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
2

Statistical Analysis of Alzheimer's Disease

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
GraphPad Prism vs.7 (San Diego, CA, USA) was used for statistical analyses. All data sets were analyzed for significant outliers using the ROUT method. Statistics is provided for both presence and absence of the significant outliers. D’Agostino & Pearson omnibus normality test was used to test data sets for Gaussian distribution before conducting comparisons of groups. Mouse groups from Aβ-measurements (histological and biochemical) and the Mesoscale cytokine ELISA assay were compared using Two-way ANOVA and Fisher’s LSD test for planned comparisons accompanied with correction for multiple comparisons for each experiment: The significance level was calculated by dividing the chosen alpha level (0.05) with the planned number of scientifically relevant comparisons. The calculated significance level is reported in figure legends and main text for each experiment in the Results section. Graphs illustrate mean with S.E.M., unless otherwise stated. All given p-values are two-tailed. Linear regression analysis was used to compare individual mice, and results were reported as coefficient of determination (r2).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
3

Statistical Analysis of Experimental Data

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The results were statistically analyzed by ANOVA tests (one-way and two-way ANOVA) using Prism vs. 7 (GraphPad Software, Inc.). Statistical differences between mean values are marked with letters for the different conditions or were marked with asterisks (*p ≤ .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001; and ****p < .0001).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
4

Statistical Analysis of Experimental Data

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
We expressed the data as the mean ± standard deviation of the means (S.D.). The statistical difference between the two variables with normal distribution was assessed by the two-tailed unpaired Student’s t test and the difference between three or more variables with normal distribution by one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) using the Newman–Keuls’ test for post hoc analysis. Variables with skewed distribution were evaluated by the two-tailed Mann–Whitney U test or the Kruskal–Wallis ANOVA with Dunn’s test. P value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. We used GraphPad Prism vs. 7 (GraphPad Software, Inc., San Diego, CA) to perform the statistical analysis.
+ 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
The results are displayed as the mean ± standard deviation of the means (SD) unless otherwise specified. The statistical difference between the two variables was assessed by the unpaired Student’s t-test and the difference between three or more variables by one-way analysis of variance using Newman–Keuls’ test for post hoc analysis unless otherwise specified. p-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. We used GraphPad Prism vs. 7 (GraphPad Software, Inc., San Diego, CA, USA) to perform the statistical analysis.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
6

Statistical Analysis of Research Findings

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The results are expressed as the mean ± standard deviation of the means (S.D.) unless otherwise specified. The statistical difference between three or more variables was calculated by ANOVA with posthoc analysis using Fisher’s predicted least significant difference test. p-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. We used GraphPad Prism vs. 7 (GraphPad Software, Inc., San Diego, CA, USA) to perform the statistical analysis.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
7

Statistical Analysis of Research Data

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Data are described as the mean ± standard deviation of the means (S.D.) unless otherwise specified. The statistical difference between two variables was assessed by Mann–Whitney U test and the difference between three or more variables by analysis of variance using Tukey’s test for post-hoc analysis. P value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. We performed the statistical analysis using GraphPad Prism vs 7 (GraphPad Software, Inc., San Diego, CA).
+ 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!