The largest database of trusted experimental protocols
Sourced in Austria, United States

Ggplot2 is a powerful data visualization package for the R programming language. It provides a consistent and elegant way to create a wide variety of plots, from simple scatter plots to complex multi-panel figures. At its core, Ggplot2 is a grammar of graphics, which allows users to build up plots in a step-by-step fashion, adding layers of information such as axes, labels, and annotations.

Automatically generated - may contain errors

50 protocols using ggplot2

1

Revealing GNPNAT1 Protein Interactions

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The STRING tool (https://string-db.org/) was used to download the list of the most significant 50 proteins that bind to GNPNAT1, with support from experimental evidence. Additionally, the top 100 genes correlated with GNPNAT1 were obtained from GEPIA2. The visualization of these top 100 GNPNAT1-correlated genes was generated using the Tumor Immune Estimation Resource 2 version (TIMER2, http://timer.cistrome.org/) in combination with the ggplot2 package (version 3.3.3) in R software (version 3.6.3). Furthermore, the ggplot2 package (version 3.3.3) in R software (version 3.6.3) was employed to create scatter plots for the top 5 GNPNAT1-correlated genes, as well as a Venn diagram.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
2

Forecasting COVID-19 Trends Across Regions

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
We aggregated median absolute error (MdAE) and median absolute percentage error (MdAPE) variables and expressed them as medians, IQRs, and notch ranges representing 95% CIs. Notch ranges are calculated as ±1.58 × IQR/√n [33 (link),34 ] as implemented using the R function geom_boxplot within the package ggplot2 (The R Foundation) [35 ]. Nonoverlapping comparisons of confidence intervals represent statistically significant differences [36 (link),37 (link)] with P values less than .01 [38 (link)-41 (link)]. P values conveying significant differences between groups are calculated using Mood’s median test [42 (link),43 ]. MdAE compared forecasting outcomes at shared geographic levels due to similarities in scale [44 (link)]. MdAPE compared each forecasting method’s outcomes across geographic level due to differing scales [45 (link)].
We created 226,468 forecasts across the county, health district, and state levels over the period of March 7 through April 22, 2020. Due to the naïve and growth rate methods only utilizing 1-day look-backs and the ARMA and ARIMA methods requiring more than 1-day look-backs, five forecast methods exist for each comparison. Analyses were performed with R software, version 3.6.3 (The R Foundation).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
3

Comprehensive Analysis with TreeAge and R

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The model was implemented in TreeAge Pro (version 15.1.0.0, 2015; TreeAge Software). The statistical software R (version 3.1.0, 2015; R Foundation for Statistical Computing) was used for plots (ggplot2, version 1.0.1, 2015) and for obtaining transition probabilities from the Aalen‐Johansen transition estimates (msSurv, version 1.1‐2, 2012).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
4

PRAD RNA-seq Data Analysis

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
We downloaded the level 3 HTseq-FPKM RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) data of PRAD from TCGA. The RNA-seq data in FPKM format was converted into TPM format, and log2 transformation was performed to compare the expression among samples. The R package “ggplot2” in R version 3.6.3 (The R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria) was also employed to draw the boxplots and line plots. The statistical analysis was conducted using the Wilcoxon rank -um test and Wilcoxon signed rank test for unpaired and paired samples, respectively. A P value <0.05 was considered to be statistically significant.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
5

Gastric Cancer Incidence and Mortality Trends

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
We described the numbers and age-standardized rates of GC incidence and mortality by grouping the data into 6 subgroups by sex and age-specific groups (15-49, 50-69, and ≥70 years). We also used the indicator of the estimated annual percentage change (EAPC) to describe the temporal trend of ASIR and ASMR of GC from 1990 to 2019. Based on a regression model fitted to the natural logarithm of the rate [ln(rate) = α + β*(calendar year) + ε], EAPC was calculated [100 × (exp(β)-1)] 17 (link)-19 (link). The 95% confidence interval (CI) of EAPC was also obtained from the fitted model 17 (link)-19 (link). All results were visualized using the packages of ggplot2 and RcolorBrewer of the R program (Version 3.6.2; R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
6

Phylogeographic Analysis of Non-Derived Strains

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Only non derived strains were included in the phylogeographic analysis. Metadata corresponding to the country of origin and the year of sampling were considered in the analysis, using Beast 2.5 software (Bouckaert et al., 2019 ). Substitution model averaging was estimated using boMdelTest package on Beast 2.5 (Bouckaert and Drummond, 2017 (link)). Phylogeographic analysis was carried out considering country of origin as a discrete trait and year of sampling as sampling date. GTR was used as substitution model. Uncorrelated relaxed lognormal clock was used as a molecular clock model (Drummond et al., 2006 (link)). Bayesian skyline was used as population model for this analysis (Drummond et al., 2005 (link)). The analysis was set to run for 30 million iterations. Tracer software was used to assess for Effective Sampling Size (ESS). Maximum credibility tree was generated and annotated using Tree Annotator. The resulting tree was edited and visualized using ggmap (Kahle and Wickham, 2013 ) and ggplot2 (Wickham, 2016 ) packages on R 3.5 Software (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria);
All results were rendered to KML format using SpreadD3 software and visualized on Google Earth (Bielejec et al., 2016 (link)).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
7

Survival Analysis of Downstaging in Cancer

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Categorical variables were compared using the chi-squared test. Non-normally distributed data were analysed using the Mann–Whitney U test. Comparisons were made for the main explanatory variable, namely the extent of downstaging (that is upstaged, no change, or downstaged by one stage, two stages, or three or more stages). survival was estimated using Kaplan–Meier survival curves and compared using the log rank test. Multivariable analyses used Cox proportional hazards models to adjust for clinically relevant variables to produce adjusted HR and 95 per cent confidence intervals. P < 0.050 was considered to be statistically significant. Data analysis was performed using R Foundation Statistical Software (R 3.2.2) with the TableOne, ggplot2, Hmisc, Matchit, and survival packages (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria) as previously described10 ,11 (link). This study was exempt from Institutional Review Board approval.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
8

Statistical Methods for Survival Analysis

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Categorical variables were compared using the Kruskal–Wallis test, and non-normally distributed data were analyzed using the Mann–Whitney U test. survival was estimated using Kaplan–Meier survival curves and compared using the log-rank test. A p-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Data analysis was performed using R Foundation Statistical software (R 3.2.2) with TableOne, ggplot2, Hmisc, and survival packages (The R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria) as previously described.19 (link),25 (link),26 (link)
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
9

Statistical Analysis of VAS Reduction by Disease

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Descriptive methods were used to analyze the majority of data. Chi-square tests were used to evaluate frequency differences between survey years. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to determine estimators for VAS reduction stratified by disease. All analyses, including problem score evaluation, are based on the statistical software package SAS 9.3 (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA). Figures were created by using the package ggplot2 [20 ], version 2.0.0 (Hadley Wickham), for the software environment R [21 ], version 3.2.2 (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
10

Hospital Characteristics and Adjusted Overuse Rates

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
We used multiple linear regression to report the adjusted composite overuse means for each hospital characteristic level, adjusted for the other hospital characteristics.21 We made post-hoc pairwise comparisons of hospital characteristics with Tukey P value and CI adjustment. A P value of 0.05 was used to indicate significance, and all tests were 2-sided. For the cluster comparison, we compared the proportions of each hospital characteristic within each cluster against its proportion in the entire cohort of hospitals. Because this difference in proportions is largely affected by sample size, we also calculated the Cohen h value and reported results where h was greater than 0.2.22 Claims analysis was performed using SAS Enterprise, version 7.15 HF8 (SAS Institute) on the CMS Virtual Research Data Center, and statistical analyses were performed from July 1, 2020, to December 20, 2020, using Python programming, version 3.7 and R, version 4.0.0 (using the tidyverse, ggplot2, ggridges, and matplotlib packages; R Foundation).23 ,24 ,25 (link),26 ,27 (link) The hospital normalized rates, characteristics, and clusters output are available for reference.35
+ 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!