Reader Comments

Post a new comment on this article

Statistical analysis clarification and reference to data submission link requested

Posted by kwitwer1 on 07 Apr 2012 at 19:12 GMT

The authors are commended for this important study of cervical carcinoma biomarkers and for their rigorous testing of the PCR array they designed. Addressing the following matters would help me (and perhaps other readers) to understand this report better.
1. Was one Ct value per feature and sample obtained, or were technical replicates performed and averaged?
2. How were the p-values in Table S2 derived? The t-test is mentioned, and it appears both that multiple group comparisons were made (stage, metastasis) and that comparisons were made for all miRNAs, but there is no description of a multiple comparison correction. Were the results corrected for multiple comparisons? If not, because of the large number of comparisons, the significance of the reported results would be unclear.
3. To maximize the impact of these valuable data--and to ensure compliance with PLoS ONE policy (see http://www.plosone.org/st... )--the authors are encouraged to provide the accession number for the PCR array data if they have been submitted, or, if not, to upload their raw and processed array data to a public repository such as GEO or ArrayExpress.

No competing interests declared.

RE: Statistical analysis clarification and reference to data submission link requested

zhengmin replied to kwitwer1 on 19 Apr 2012 at 15:22 GMT

Answer1: there were no technical replicates designed in the PCR array.

Answer2: The result of this study obtained from GeneCopoeia's online Data Analysis System. This Data Analysis System uses the ΔΔCT method. We perform the analysis followed the instructions.The use of this Data Analysis System is free of charge and available at www.genecopoeia.com.cn/pr....

We will upload our array data to GEO.

No competing interests declared.