Module 12: Network and Pathway Analysis of ‘Omics Data
This is more relevant for a downstream analysis of modern data.
12 Matching Annotations
- Sep 2016
-
cnsgenomics.com cnsgenomics.com
-
-
Module 10: Statistical and Quantitative Genetics of Disease Module 11: MCMC for Genetics
Here I can't makeup my mind on which is more relevant Mat's expertise is needed.
-
Module 9: Gene expression and Methylation Profiling
More focused on gene expression and methylation data analysis.
-
Module 8: Advanced (Human) Quantitative Genetics
Much more relevant for the project than Module 7.
-
Module 7: Genomic Prediction and Selection
A module of relevance.
Details annotated: https://via.hypothes.is/http://cnsgenomics.com/sisg/Module7.html
-
Module 6: QC & Analysis of Methylation Chip data
Unless we are analyzing Chip data ourselves I don't think this is necessary (I did use some of the technics and tools in my previous position).
-
Module 5: Population Genetic Data Analysis
Very relevant and right up the project's alley.
-
Module 4: Mixed Models in Quantitative Genetics
I believe it is non-relevant to the project for the time being, especially that we don't have at our disposal family data.
-
Module 3: Association Mapping: GWAS & Sequencing Data
I don't think this module is really necessary as the tools they introduce are easy to use (PLINK and R).
-
Module 2: Genetic Epidemiology
Very relevant as well as the module provides in combination with Module 1 the backbone of the theory needed to conduct the research project.
Details annotated: https://via.hypothes.is/http://cnsgenomics.com/sisg/Module2.html
-
Module 1: Quantitative Genetics
Interesting module, introduces the base concepts needed to conduct the project, for instance the analysis of complex characters where both genetic and environment factors contribute to trait variation.
Details annotated: https://via.hypothes.is/http://cnsgenomics.com/sisg/Module1.html
-
- Jul 2016
-
blogs.bmj.com blogs.bmj.com
-
The reviewers post their reviews and these too are citable. Anybody can comment at any stage and authors can respond to reviewers. Peer review becomes more of a scientific debate and a process for improvement than an arbitrary judgment. The authors might revise their paper in light of the reviewers’ comments, in which case the study will be given a new citation.
This is very important as the reviewers are in the moral obligation to provide a very thorough and unbiased reviews. often time, the publications get judged by the affiliation of the authors, or how famous the last author is.
-