Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21447708›Full record

ArticleMolecular & cellular proteomics : MCP2011

Hierarchical clustering of shotgun proteomics data.

Ville R Koskinen, Patrick A Emery, David M Creasy, John S Cottrell

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Molecular & cellular proteomics : MCP, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 54 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Proteome Analysis ofPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Exploitation of Olive (Antioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Immune activation duringiScience · 2021
    Article
  12. Peptide-based quorum sensing systems inLife science alliance · 2020
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ville R KoskinenMatrix Science Ltd., London, UK.
Patrick A Emery
David M Creasy
John S Cottrell
Wellcome Centre for Cell-Matrix Research · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A new result report for Mascot search results is described. A greedy set cover algorithm is used to create a minimal set of proteins, which is then grouped into families on the basis of shared peptide matches. Protein families with multiple members are represented by dendrograms, generated by hierarchical clustering using the score of the nonshared peptide matches as a distance metric. The peptide matches to the proteins in a family can be compared side by side to assess the experimental evidence for each protein. If the evidence for a particular family member is considered inadequate, the dendrogram can be cut to reduce the number of distinct family members.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsCluster AnalysisAmino Acid SequenceComputer SimulationDatabases, ProteinModels, MolecularMolecular Sequence DataMolecular WeightPeptide FragmentsProteomicsSequence Analysis, ProteinTandem Mass SpectrometryPeptide Fragments

Identifiers

PMID21447708
PMCPMC3108832
OpenAlexW2123244151

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.