· 4 min · DM&M Consulting & Solutions
A sequencing run or an expression table is a starting point. The lab still has to decide which comparison matters, which samples can be trusted, and which pattern is strong enough to change the next experiment. That judgment is the analysis.
We ask the group to say, in one sentence, what they would do differently if the result held. If that sentence is missing, the computation has nothing to serve. Plots can still be produced. They will not settle the study.
Then we test the data against that sentence. Gaps in labeling, a comparison the study never designed, or a sample size too thin for the claim should be named before a model gets more elaborate. Complexity will not repair a design problem.
What we return is short: the pattern, our confidence in it, and the next experimental step. A collaborator should be able to follow it without a tour of the pipeline. That is the standard we use for biological data work.