ArticleProteomics2010
Integrated data management and validation platform for phosphorylated tandem mass spectrometry data.
Article in Proteomics, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Computer aided manual validation of mass spectrometry-based proteomic data.Methods (San Diego, Calif.) · 2013Article
- Toward quantitative phosphotyrosine profiling in vivo.Seminars in cell & developmental biology · 2012Review
- Minireview: progress and challenges in proteomics data management, sharing, and integration.Molecular endocrinology (Baltimore, Md.) · 2012Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
MS/MS is a widely used method for proteome-wide analysis of protein expression and PTMs. The thousands of MS/MS spectra produced from a single experiment pose a major challenge for downstream analysis. Standard programs, such as MASCOT, provide peptide assignments for many of the spectra, including identification of PTM sites, but these results are plagued by false-positive identifications. In phosphoproteomic experiments, only a single peptide assignment is typically available to support identification of each phosphorylation site, and hence minimizing false positives is critical. Thus, tedious manual validation is often required to increase confidence in the spectral assignments. We have developed phoMSVal, an open-source platform for managing MS/MS data and automatically validating identified phosphopeptides. We tested five classification algorithms with 17 extracted features to separate correct peptide assignments from incorrect ones using over 2600 manually curated spectra. The naïve Bayes algorithm was among the best classifiers with an AUC value of 97% and PPV of 97% for phosphotyrosine data. This classifier required only three features to achieve a 76% decrease in false positives as compared with MASCOT while retaining 97% of true positives. This algorithm was able to classify an independent phosphoserine/threonine data set with AUC value of 93% and PPV of 91%, demonstrating the applicability of this method for all types of phospho-MS/MS data. PhoMSVal is available at http://csbi.ltdk.helsinki.fi/phomsval.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.