The largest database of trusted experimental protocols

237 protocols using statview software

1

Analyzing Gene Expression and Protein Abundance

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Group comparisons were investigated with the application of a one-way ANOVA statistical model.
Microarray data analysis: DAT files were analyzed by Expression Console (Affymetrix Inc.). The full data set was normalized by using the Robust Multi alignment Algorithm (RMA). The obtained expression values were analyzed by using the Affymetrix Transcription Analysis Console (TAC) software (Applied Biosystem – Thermo scientific-Italy). Further normalization steps included a per chip normalization to 50th percentile and a per gene normalization to median. Results were filtered for fold change >1.5. Statistical analysis was performed using the ANOVA using as p-value cutoff 0.05 and 0.0, respectively. Relative mRNA expression was reported as relative quantitation (RQ) values, calculated as 2-ΔΔCt, where ΔCt is calculated as Cttarget gene - Cthousekeeping genes (PolR2A mRNA expression). Differences between VPG vs CG were considered statistically significant at p < 0.05. We used one-way ANOVA calculated with StatView software (version 5.0.1.0; SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, United States). Relative protein abundance of ATG5, ATG12, HSP90, HSP70, Bcl-2, and PSMD13 was calculated with respect to GAPDH protein abundance and analyzed with the ANOVA calculated with StatView software (version 5.0.1.0; SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, United States).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
2

Immunoglobulin Antibody Levels Analysis

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Comparisons of differences among mean antibody levels, mean frequencies of Ig positive cells and mean number of Ig-secreting spots of different groups were made using the ANOVA procedure (STATVIEW Software, SAS Institute, Inc, Cary, NC, USA). Correlation analysis between total IgG and antigen-specific IgG were performed using Z test (STATVIEW Software, SAS Institute, Inc, Cary, NC, USA) [17 (link)]. A difference between comparison groups of P<0.05 level was considered significant.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
3

Immunoglobulin Antibody Levels Analysis

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Comparisons of differences among mean antibody levels, mean frequencies of Ig positive cells and mean number of Ig-secreting spots of different groups were made using the ANOVA procedure (STATVIEW Software, SAS Institute, Inc, Cary, NC, USA). Correlation analysis between total IgG and antigen-specific IgG were performed using Z test (STATVIEW Software, SAS Institute, Inc, Cary, NC, USA) [17 (link)]. A difference between comparison groups of P<0.05 level was considered significant.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
4

Survival Analysis of Disease Cohort

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Baseline demographics and digital background were summarised with descriptive statistics. Survival probabilities were estimated by the Kaplan–Meier method. Progression-free survival (PFS) was defined as the time from inclusion to progression; and overall survival (OS) was defined as the time from inclusion to all-cause death. All statistical analyses were carried out with Statview software (SAS Institute, Cary, NC). All tests were two-tailed, and p values lower than 0.05 were considered significant (Supplementary Material).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
5

Biomarker Analysis of ASD Subgroups

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Descriptive statistics were computed for selected demographic variables across diagnostic groups. Contingency tables were used to perform the frequency analysis. Since the molecule’s values were not normally distributed, we used log-transformed values with parametric statistic tests and non-parametric tests to compare GI vs. No-GI subjects (Mann-Whitney test) and to compare EO ASD vs. Reg-DD vs. Reg + DD (Kruskall-Wallis test) for all the selected molecules.
Correlation and regression analysis were computed to study the relationship between the molecules and the identified clinical parameters. Findings with p value <0.05 were considered significant. StatView software (version 5.0.1; SAS Institute, Abacus Concept Inc., Berkeley, CA, USA) was used for data analyses. To discriminate different subgroups of ASD children based on biomarker levels, we performed Principal Component Analysis (PCA) using as correlated variables: sex, BMI, age, and cytokine levels (TNFa, IL6, CCL2, leptin, resistin and PAI 1). After log transformation and auto scaling (e.g., mean-centered and divided by standard deviation of each variable) PCA was performed using MetaboAnalystR 1.0.3 (Xia Lab, McGill University, Montreal, Canada). We checked quality control of samples using PCA that allowed us to label the 85 samples as outlier so it was excluded from downstream analysis.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
6

Nonparametric Statistical Comparisons

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Statistical comparisons were performed with the unpaired Mann–Whitney U test. Analyses were performed with StatView software (SAS Institute Japan, Tokyo, Japan), and the level of significance was set at P < 0.05.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
7

Statistical Analysis of Experimental Data

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Experimental data were analyzed using one-way or two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). Fisher-PLSD post hoc tests were also performed after significant main effects for drug, time or luminescence intensity were observed. The criterion for statistical significance was p < 0.05. Statistical analyses were performed using Stat View software (version 5.0; SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
8

Quantitative Western Blot Analysis

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Densitometric quantification of western blots was performed with the AIDA software (Raytest, Staubenhardt, Germany). Data were analysed by Kruskall-Wallis and Mann–Whitney tests with the StatView software (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
9

Comprehensive Statistical Analysis of Oncological Outcomes

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Values are expressed as mean ± standard error of the mean (S.E.M). For the in vitro assays, significant differences between groups were assessed using two-sided student’s t test. For quantitative immunoblotting, significant differences between groups were assessed by ANOVA. Analyses were performed using GraphPad Prism 4 software (GraphPad Software Inc., La Jolla, CA, USA) and statistical significance was set at a p-value < 0.05. Survival analysis was performed using the StatView software platform (SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA), Kaplan-Meier analyses were performed on each cohort (disease-specific survival [DSS]) and statistical significance was determined by using the log-rank test. Fisher’s exact test and Chi-square testing were also used to determine the significance of clinico-pathological factors (grade, hormone receptor status, HER2 status, and treatment) in predicting survival.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
10

Statistical Analysis of Experimental Data

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Data are expressed as mean ± standard deviation or percentage. Statistical analysis was performed using the Student’s t-test or one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with post hoc Turkey–Kramer tests. All data analyses were performed with the StatView software (version 5.0; SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA). Differences at P-values of less than 0.05 were regarded as significant.
+ 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!