It could be seen that the mean value of correct rate of prediction was about 50% with small fluctuations.
Variations of correlation coefficients were generally consistent with those of correct rates across the whole genome.
According to Fig. 6, in terms of correct rate, performance of imputation for crossbred animals was almost as good as that for purebred animals.
Besides, the plots of "correct rate" indicating the percentage of active lever presses during each session (see Figures 3(c) and 3(d)) showed that the optogenetic rats held a significantly higher correct rate than the controls for most sessions.
When a combined reference population was used, imputation was better for purebred animals than for crossbred animals in terms of correct rate, although the improvement was very small (around 0.006).
Calculation of corrected rates, using data on PPV and sensitivity of reporting from validation studies, can provide additional estimates which can help to inform a choice as to the best estimate of the true rates.
Moreover, the less training samples also caused the fluctuation of low correct rate of prediction.
Clinicians' viewpoint of improving the correct rate of our technique is explained in detail.
Because we investigated only three conditions per subject, the likelihood of correct field rating by chance was relatively high.
They had relatively low knowledge about the "prevention and treatment" and "causes" of dementia, with overall correct rate of 78.6 % and 85.4 %, respectively.
(B) The plot of the relative correct rate versus the number of iterations.
