Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23481661›Full record

ReviewMolecular & cellular proteomics : MCP2013

Identification of protein interactions involved in cellular signaling.

Jukka Westermarck, Johanna Ivaska, Garry L Corthals

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Molecular & cellular proteomics : MCP, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 64 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
64citing 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

64 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Alphafuser: a parsimonious approach to predicting higher-order protein complexes.Acta crystallographica. Section D, Structural biology · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review

4 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

3 authors.

Jukka WestermarckCentre for Biotechnology, University of Turku and Åbo Akademi, Turku, Finland.
Johanna Ivaska
Garry L Corthals

Funding

European Research Council 202809
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Protein-protein interactions drive biological processes. They are critical for all intra- and extracellular functions, and the technologies to analyze them are widely applied throughout the various fields of biological sciences. This study takes an in-depth view of some common principles of cellular regulation and provides a detailed account of approaches required to comprehensively map signaling protein-protein interactions in any particular cellular system or condition. We provide a critical review of the benefits and disadvantages of the yeast two-hybrid method and affinity purification coupled with mass spectrometric procedures for identification of signaling protein-protein interactions. In particular, we emphasize the quantitative and qualitative differences between tandem affinity and one-step purification (such as FLAG and Strep tag) methods. Although applicable to all types of interaction studies, a special section is devoted in this review to aspects that should be considered when attempting to identify signaling protein interactions that often are transient and weak by nature. Finally, we discuss shotgun and quantitative information that can be gleaned by MS-coupled methods for analysis of multiprotein complexes.

Indexed as

HumansMass SpectrometryProtein Interaction MappingSignal TransductionTwo-Hybrid System Techniques

Identifiers

PMID23481661
PMCPMC3708163

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.