Kansas City Area Life Sciences Institute - keynote @ annual dinner
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Like this? Share it with your network

Share

Kansas City Area Life Sciences Institute - keynote @ annual dinner

  • 1,159 views
Uploaded on

 

More in: Technology , Business
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
1,159
On Slideshare
1,143
From Embeds
16
Number of Embeds
1

Actions

Shares
Downloads
3
Comments
0
Likes
1

Embeds 16

https://twitter.com 16

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. KCALSI Annual Dinner Keynote @wilbanks October 1, 2013
  • 2. 1. give me a place to stand, and a lever, and i shall move the world.
  • 3. every age has its own lever.
  • 4. ours is cheap data.
  • 5. cheap data changes how we justify our opinions.
  • 6. OPS = AB(H + BB + HBP) + TB(AB + BB + SF + HBP) / AB(AB + BB + SF + HBP)
  • 7. 2. research data v. consumer data
  • 8. https://www.scienceexchange.com/
  • 9. 3. engaging a larger cohort (or, “crowdsourcing”).
  • 10. tension between anonymity and utility.
  • 11. “more like plutonium than gold”
  • 12. tension between expectation and reuse.
  • 13. our data isn’t worth much - on its own.
  • 14. $.50 to $2.50 for SSN, birthdate, etc.
  • 15. $5 to $15 for credit checks, health records
  • 16. the value is in the aggregate.
  • 17. 4. the current approach won’t cut it.
  • 18. 33
  • 19. 34
  • 20. 35
  • 21. 36
  • 22. assume 1,000,000 downloads assume 10% false positive rate 100,000 doctor visits $1000 per biopsy
  • 23. that’s the setup.
  • 24. sharing by small but coherent groups can create asymmetrically valuable resources.
  • 25. small group sharing
  • 26. proven to work in: software content
  • 27. let’s try a small but coherent group to share data and see if it works in science.
  • 28. Omberg,  et  al.  Nature  Gene*cs •Analysis of: 12 Tumor types, 6 molecular profiling platforms •Focus series of: 4 papers in Nature Genetics, with 14 more to follow in other NPG journals TCGA Pan-Cancer Consortium
  • 29. 68core projects
  • 30. 248researchers
  • 31. 28institutions
  • 32. 1070datasets
  • 33. 1723results
  • 34. 18papers in press
  • 35. let’s try a small but coherent group to share data and see if it works in health.
  • 36. “eat less and exercise”
  • 37. the experiment:
  • 38. volunteer must click to proceed all boxes must be checked
  • 39. http://opensnp.org/users/615
  • 40. http://files.snpedia.com/reports/promethease_data/genome_jtw_ui2.html
  • 41. “Also there is no suggestion of consanguinity in your pedigree.” http://www.ianlogan.co.uk/
  • 42. it’s likely that we will end up with a sharing monopoly of some sort.
  • 43. once entrenched, hard to move.
  • 44. instinct of institution: to increment.
  • 45. a. “just like now, but moreso”
  • 46. b. the cartel.
  • 47. c. an open system.
  • 48. 77
  • 49. “in the end, all data is either deleted or made public” - quinn norton
  • 50. shared data will be the fulcrum.
  • 51. thank you @wilbanks john.wilbanks@sagebase.org