Transcriptomic analysis is straightforward to run and easy to run badly. We handle both bulk and single-cell RNA-seq from raw reads through to biological interpretation: quality control, alignment and quantification, differential expression with an appropriate statistical model, and pathway-level interpretation. For single-cell data we add integration, clustering, annotation and trajectory analysis. Experimental design and batch structure are examined first, because no amount of downstream sophistication rescues a confounded comparison.
Replication, batch structure and confounding are assessed at the start. Where design limits what can be concluded, we say so before the analysis rather than in the discussion section.
Model choice, covariate handling and multiple-testing correction are selected for your design instead of applied from a default pipeline, and the choices are documented.
Single-cell clusters are annotated using reference mapping and marker evidence together, with ambiguous or mixed populations labelled as such rather than given a confident name.
Figures are delivered as editable vector files with the methods text and software versions needed for a manuscript or regulatory submission.
Computational predictions prioritise hypotheses; they do not independently establish binding, biological activity, therapeutic efficacy, safety or clinical validity. Performance depends on input quality, target class, the structural evidence available and the applicability domain of the selected methods. Scores used for ranking are comparative devices and should not be read as measured quantities. All deliverables are for research use only and are not intended for diagnostic or therapeutic use.
| Item | Specification | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Bulk samples | 4–500+ | Minimum three replicates per group for meaningful statistics |
| Single-cell scale | Up to millions of cells | Across samples and integrated datasets |
| Typical turnaround | 2–5 weeks | Single-cell projects at the longer end |
| Output | Tables, objects, figures, code | Including reproducible analysis scripts |
We discuss the objective, the decision it supports and the data you hold. Nothing is quoted before we understand what the result has to answer.
We check that the data, target class and available structural evidence can support the proposed approach, and say plainly where they cannot.
Scope, methods, deliverables, timeline and price are confirmed in writing, together with the limitations we expect to report.
The analysis runs on pinned tool versions in a containerised environment, with quality checkpoints and method comparison where that is informative.
You receive the ranked results, the documented methods, the limitations and a proposed validation plan, plus support in interpreting them.
The failure modes that produce confident-looking results which do not survive the next experiment. Each one is designed against rather than discovered afterwards.
Illustrative of the shape this work takes. Details are generalised, no client or target is identified, and scope and outcome vary with the system in question.
Note: ICDMO delivers computational (in silico) services. Results prioritise hypotheses for testing; they do not by themselves establish binding, biological activity, efficacy or safety. All deliverables are for research use only and are not intended for diagnostic or therapeutic use. Downstream experimental work is scoped separately and executed through qualified partners.
Tell us about the target, the data you hold and the decision the result needs to support. A scientist reviews every enquiry and replies within one business day.
