-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 34
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
Multiple Random Effects #134
Comments
Hi,
No renaming the column won't help, right now it's not possible to specify 2 random effect variables.
How are the individuals spread across the batches? If you have large batches containing the different experimental groups, then you should be fine modeling it as a fixed effect variable (I
E. Normal covariate). If they're small, there's probably not much added value on top of the individuals effect, except of course of your aim is to understand individual vs batch variability (as opposed to identifying differences between experimental groups).
Note also that we did not, in benchmarks, find an advantage of cell-level MM over pseudobulk analysis, and with that many samples I would definitely opt for pseudobulk...
|
Using as a fixed is possible, albeit not the most optimal. Its not posible to use a mixed model an then pseudobulk the corrected expression is it? ie
|
Hi, |
I'll poke around the options and see how it pans out, thanks! |
Hi,
I have a data set of single cell RNA seq run out on 167 individuals, with individuals spread across several batches. I want to run a model across all cells such as
~ (1|Indv_ID) + (1|Batch) + cov_1 + cov_2
. From what I understand, I could change the Indvidual ID to column name to sample_id and run:But this would only specify a mixed linear model of
~ (1|Indv_ID) + (1|Batch) + cov_1 + cov_2
correct?How could I add Batch as random effect, would renaming the column ID of batch to (1|Batch) ?
Thanks
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: