Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20831241›Full record

ArticleJournal of proteome research2010

Combined statistical analyses of peptide intensities and peptide occurrences improves identification of significant peptides from MS-based proteomics data.

Bobbie-Jo M Webb-Robertson, Lee Ann McCue, Katrina M Waters, Melissa M Matzke, Jon M Jacobs, Thomas O Metz, Susan M Varnum, Joel G Pounds

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of proteome research, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 75 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
75citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

75 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Itaconic acid production is regulated by LaeA inMetabolic engineering communications · 2022
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

15 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Bobbie-Jo M Webb-RobertsonPacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, WA 99352, USA. bj@pnl.gov
Lee Ann McCue
Katrina M Waters
Melissa M Matzke
Jon M Jacobs
Thomas O Metz
Susan M Varnum
Joel G Pounds

Funding

Visual Analytics Software Environment for Proteomics Data IntegrationR01GM084892 · NIGMS · BATTELLE PACIFIC NORTHWEST LABORATORIES · PI WEBB-ROBERTSON, BOBBIE-JO MARY · 2009 to 2010
$935k
NIAID NIH HHS HHSN272200800060CNIGMS NIH HHS 1R011GM-084892NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM084892
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry-based (LC-MS) proteomics uses peak intensities of proteolytic peptides to infer the differential abundance of peptides/proteins. However, substantial run-to-run variability in intensities and observations (presence/absence) of peptides makes data analysis quite challenging. The missing observations in LC-MS proteomics data are difficult to address with traditional imputation-based approaches because the mechanisms by which data are missing are unknown a priori. Data can be missing due to random mechanisms such as experimental error or nonrandom mechanisms such as a true biological effect. We present a statistical approach that uses a test of independence known as a G-test to test the null hypothesis of independence between the number of missing values across experimental groups. We pair the G-test results, evaluating independence of missing data (IMD) with an analysis of variance (ANOVA) that uses only means and variances computed from the observed data. Each peptide is therefore represented by two statistical confidence metrics, one for qualitative differential observation and one for quantitative differential intensity. We use three LC-MS data sets to demonstrate the robustness and sensitivity of the IMD-ANOVA approach.

Indexed as

Analysis of VarianceData Interpretation, StatisticalMass SpectrometryPeptidesProteomicsSensitivity and SpecificityPeptides

Identifiers

PMID20831241
PMCPMC2974810

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.