%0 Figure %A Chen, Ming-Huang %A R. Yang, Wu-Lung %A Lin, Kuan-Ting %A Liu, Chia-Hung %A Liu, Yu-Wen %A Huang, Kai-Wen %A Mu-Hsin Chang, Peter %A Lai, Jin-Mei %A Hsu, Chun-Nan %A Chao, Kun-Mao %A Kao, Cheng-Yan %A Huang, Chi-Ying F. %D 2011 %T Flowchart and comparisons of prediction accuracy. %U https://plos.figshare.com/articles/figure/_Flowchart_and_comparisons_of_prediction_accuracy_/385458 %R 10.1371/journal.pone.0027186.g002 %2 https://plos.figshare.com/ndownloader/files/715108 %K comparisons %X

(A) The CMap analysis flowchart. All eight sets from EHCO2 (Group 1), 100-member random sets, Frequent sets, and Clique sets (Group 2) were individually queried with CMap. Only drugs with a p-value of less than 0.05 and a negative enrichment score were retained. (B) Comparison of the accuracy of predicted drugs from each set. The top 10 drugs from each set were labeled according to their anti-cancer effects. (C) The comparison of the Frequency sets and the Clique sets. The average effectiveness of drugs was compared side by side.

%I PLOS ONE