ArticleBioinformatics and biology insights2024
The TWW Growth Model and Its Application in the Analysis of Quantitative Polymerase Chain Reaction.
Article in Bioinformatics and biology insights, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
It is necessary to accurately capture the growth trajectory of fluorescence where the best fit, precision, and relative efficiency are essential. Having this in mind, a new family of growth functions called TWW (Tabatabai, Wilus, Wallace) was introduced. This model is capable of accurately analyzing quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR). This new family provides a reproducible quantitation of gene copies and is less labor-intensive than current quantitative methods. A new cycle threshold based on TWW that does not need the assumption of equal reaction efficiency was introduced. The performance of TWW was compared with 3 classical models (Gompertz, logistic, and Richard) using qPCR data. TWW models the relationship between the cycle number and fluorescence intensity, outperforming some state-of-the-art models in performance measures. The 3-parameter TWW model had the best model fit in 68.57% of all cases, followed by the Richard model (28.57%) and the logistic (2.86%). Gompertz had the worst fit in 88.57% of all cases. It had the best precision in 85.71% of all cases followed by Richard (14.29%). For all cases, Gompertz had the worst precision. TWW had the best relative efficiency in 54.29% of all cases, while the logistic model was best in 17.14% of all cases. Richard and Gompertz tied for the best relative efficiency in 14.29% of all cases. The results indicate that TWW is a good competitor when considering model fit, precision, and efficiency. The 3-parameter TWW model has fewer parameters when compared to the Richard model in analyzing qPCR data, which makes it less challenging to reach convergence.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.