Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Added separate param for setting qval threshold for pathway analysis #253

Open
wants to merge 5 commits into
base: dev
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

WackerO
Copy link
Collaborator

@WackerO WackerO commented Nov 19, 2024

... in order to allow different values for the qval in DE analysis and pathway analysis. If not set by the user, the pathway analysis will continue to use the same threshold as for DE analysis.

PR checklist

  • This comment contains a description of changes (with reason).
  • If you've fixed a bug or added code that should be tested, add tests!
  • If you've added a new tool - have you followed the pipeline conventions in the contribution docs
  • Make sure your code lints (nf-core lint).
  • Ensure the test suite passes (nextflow run . -profile test,docker --outdir <OUTDIR>).
  • Usage Documentation in docs/usage.md is updated.
  • Output Documentation in docs/output.md is updated.
  • CHANGELOG.md is updated.
  • README.md is updated (including new tool citations and authors/contributors).

Copy link
Collaborator

@tillenglert tillenglert left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM! One question though, is the threshold working on adjusted pvalues, or raw values? It's a bit misleading that the adjusted pval threshold is used if this one is not set, but I couldn't find anything about the pathway_pval_threshold being used on adjusted pvals! So all in all if the new param works on adjusted pvals, you could append that to the help text in the nextflow_schema.json and Execute_report.R

@WackerO
Copy link
Collaborator Author

WackerO commented Nov 22, 2024

Many thanks, Till! Yes, it's adjusted, good point. I'll change the param name and descriptions :)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants