A Bioinformatician, Computer Scientist, and Geneticist lead bioinformatic tool development - which one is better?

Paul P. Gardner
{"title":"A Bioinformatician, Computer Scientist, and Geneticist lead bioinformatic tool development - which one is better?","authors":"Paul P. Gardner","doi":"10.1101/2024.08.25.609622","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The development of accurate bioinformatic software tools is crucial for the effective analysis of complex biological data. This study examines the relationship between the academic department affiliations of authors and the accuracy of the bioinformatic tools they develop. By analyzing a corpus of previously benchmarked bioinformatic software tools, we mapped bioinformatic tools to the academic fields of the corresponding authors and evaluated tool accuracy by field. Our results suggest that \"Medical Informatics\" outperforms all other fields in bioinformatic software accuracy, with a mean proportion of wins in accuracy rankings exceeding the null expectation. In contrast, tools developed by authors affiliated with \"Bioinformatics\" and \"Engineering\" fields tend to be less accurate. However, after correcting for multiple testing, no result is statistically significant (<em>p</em>&gt;0.05). Our findings reveal no strong association between academic field and bioinformatic software accuracy. These findings suggest that the development of interdisciplinary software applications can be effectively undertaken by any department with sufficient resources and training.","PeriodicalId":501307,"journal":{"name":"bioRxiv - Bioinformatics","volume":"3 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"bioRxiv - Bioinformatics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.08.25.609622","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The development of accurate bioinformatic software tools is crucial for the effective analysis of complex biological data. This study examines the relationship between the academic department affiliations of authors and the accuracy of the bioinformatic tools they develop. By analyzing a corpus of previously benchmarked bioinformatic software tools, we mapped bioinformatic tools to the academic fields of the corresponding authors and evaluated tool accuracy by field. Our results suggest that "Medical Informatics" outperforms all other fields in bioinformatic software accuracy, with a mean proportion of wins in accuracy rankings exceeding the null expectation. In contrast, tools developed by authors affiliated with "Bioinformatics" and "Engineering" fields tend to be less accurate. However, after correcting for multiple testing, no result is statistically significant (p>0.05). Our findings reveal no strong association between academic field and bioinformatic software accuracy. These findings suggest that the development of interdisciplinary software applications can be effectively undertaken by any department with sufficient resources and training.
生物信息学家、计算机科学家和遗传学家领导生物信息学工具的开发--哪一个更好?
开发准确的生物信息软件工具对于有效分析复杂的生物数据至关重要。本研究探讨了作者所属学科与他们开发的生物信息学工具准确性之间的关系。通过分析以前基准生物信息学软件工具的语料库,我们将生物信息学工具与相应作者的学术领域进行了映射,并按领域评估了工具的准确性。我们的结果表明,"医学信息学 "在生物信息学软件准确性方面优于所有其他领域,在准确性排名中获胜的平均比例超过了空期望值。相比之下,隶属于 "生物信息学 "和 "工程学 "领域的作者开发的工具往往准确性较低。然而,经过多重检验校正后,没有任何结果具有统计学意义(p>0.05)。我们的研究结果表明,学术领域与生物信息软件的准确性之间并无密切联系。这些研究结果表明,只要有足够的资源和培训,任何部门都可以有效地开发跨学科应用软件。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信