PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Douglas M Hawkins

Publications and source records attributed to Douglas M Hawkins.

6 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2004

Using recursive partitioning analysis to evaluate compound selection methods.

The design and analysis of a screening set for high throughput screening is complex. We examine three statistical strategies for compound selection, random, clustering, and space-filling. We examine two types of chemical descriptors, BCUTs and principal components of Dragon Constitutional descriptors. Based on the predictive power of multiple tree recursive partitioning, we reached the following tentative conclusions. Random designs appear to be as good as clustering and space-filling designs. For analysis, BCUTs appear to be better than principal components scores based upon Constitutional Descriptors. We confirm previous results that model-based selection of compounds can lead to improved screening hit rates.

Decision Trees↗
PubMed2003

Robust singular value decomposition analysis of microarray data.

In microarray data there are a number of biological samples, each assessed for the level of gene expression for a typically large number of genes. There is a need to examine these data with statistical techniques to help discern possible patterns in the data. Our technique applies a combination of mathematical and statistical methods to progressively take the data set apart so that different aspects can be examined for both general patterns and very specific effects. Unfortunately, these data tables are often corrupted with extreme values (outliers), missing values, and non-normal distributions that preclude standard analysis. We develop a robust analysis method to address these problems. The benefits of this robust analysis will be both the understanding of large-scale shifts in gene effects and the isolation of particular sample-by-gene effects that might be either unusual interactions or the result of experimental flaws. Our method requires a single pass and does not resort to complex "cleaning" or imputation of the data table before analysis. We illustrate the method with a commercial data set.

Cluster Analysis↗
PubMed2003

Prediction of human blood: air partition coefficient: a comparison of structure-based and property-based methods.

In recent years, there has been increased interest in the development and use of quantitative structure-activity/property relationship (QSAR/QSPR) models. For the most part, this is due to the fact that experimental data is sparse and obtaining such data is costly, while theoretical structural descriptors can be obtained quickly and inexpensively. In this study, three linear regression methods, viz. principal component regression (PCR), partial least squares (PLS), and ridge regression (RR), were used to develop QSPR models for the estimation of human blood:air partition coefficient (logPblood:air) for a group of 31 diverse low-molecular weight volatile chemicals from their computed molecular descriptors. In general, RR was found to be superior to PCR or PLS. Comparisons were made between models developed using parameters based solely on molecular structure and linear regression (LR) models developed using experimental properties, including saline:air partition coefficient (logPsaline:air) and olive oil:air partition coefficient (logPolive oil:air), as independent variables, indicating that the structure-property correlations are comparable to the property-property correlations. The best models, however, were those that used rat logPblood:air as the independent variable. Haloalkane subgroups were modeled separately for comparative purposes and, although models based on the congeneric compounds were superior, the models developed on the complete set of diverse compounds were of acceptable quality. The structural descriptors were placed into one of three classes based on level of complexity: topostructural (TS), topochemical (TC), or three-dimensional/geometrical (3D). Modeling was performed using the structural descriptor classes both in a hierarchical fashion and separately. The results indicate that highest quality structure-based models, in terms of descriptor classes, were those derived using TC descriptors.

Animals↗
PubMed2002

Diagnostics for conformity of paired quantitative measurements.

Matched pairs data arise in many contexts - in case-control clinical trials, for example, and from cross-over designs. They also arise in experiments to verify the equivalence of quantitative assays. This latter use (which is the main focus of this paper) raises difficulties not always seen in other matched pairs applications. Since the designs deliberately vary the analyte levels over a wide range, issues of variance dependent on mean, calibrations of differing slopes, and curvature all need to be added to the usual model assumptions such as normality. Violations in any of these assumptions invalidate the conventional matched pairs analysis. A graphical method, due to Bland and Altman, of looking at the relationship between the average and the difference of the members of the pairs is shown to correspond to a formal testable regression model. Using standard regression diagnostics, one may detect and diagnose departures from the model assumptions and remedy them - for example using variable transformations. Examples of different common scenarios and possible approaches to handling them are shown.

Chemistry Techniques, Analytical↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Assessing model fit by cross-validation.

When QSAR models are fitted, it is important to validate any fitted model-to check that it is plausible that its predictions will carry over to fresh data not used in the model fitting exercise. There are two standard ways of doing this-using a separate hold-out test sample and the computationally much more burdensome leave-one-out cross-validation in which the entire pool of available compounds is used both to fit the model and to assess its validity. We show by theoretical argument and empiric study of a large QSAR data set that when the available sample size is small-in the dozens or scores rather than the hundreds, holding a portion of it back for testing is wasteful, and that it is much better to use cross-validation, but ensure that this is done properly.

Journal Article↗