Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24916385›Full record

ArticleBioinformatics (Oxford, England)2014

MetAssign: probabilistic annotation of metabolites from LC-MS data using a Bayesian clustering approach.

Rónán Daly, Simon Rogers, Joe Wandy, Andris Jankevics, Karl E V Burgess, Rainer Breitling

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bioinformatics (Oxford, England), 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing 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

29 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Data Processing and Analysis in Mass Spectrometry-Based Metabolomics.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2023
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. MetaNetter 2: A Cytoscape plugin for ab initio network analysis and metabolite feature classification.Journal of chromatography. B, Analytical technologies in the biomedical and life sciences · 2017
    Article
  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

6 authors.

Rónán DalySchool of Computing Science, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Manchester Institute of Biotechnology, Faculty of Life Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester and Institute of Infection, Immunity and Inflammation, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Simon RogersSchool of Computing Science, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Manchester Institute of Biotechnology, Faculty of Life Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester and Institute of Infection, Immunity and Inflammation, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Joe WandySchool of Computing Science, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Manchester Institute of Biotechnology, Faculty of Life Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester and Institute of Infection, Immunity and Inflammation, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Andris JankevicsSchool of Computing Science, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Manchester Institute of Biotechnology, Faculty of Life Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester and Institute of Infection, Immunity and Inflammation, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Karl E V BurgessSchool of Computing Science, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Manchester Institute of Biotechnology, Faculty of Life Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester and Institute of Infection, Immunity and Inflammation, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Rainer BreitlingSchool of Computing Science, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Manchester Institute of Biotechnology, Faculty of Life Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester and Institute of Infection, Immunity and Inflammation, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/L018616/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

motivationThe use of liquid chromatography coupled to mass spectrometry has enabled the high-throughput profiling of the metabolite composition of biological samples. However, the large amount of data obtained can be difficult to analyse and often requires computational processing to understand which metabolites are present in a sample. This article looks at the dual problem of annotating peaks in a sample with a metabolite, together with putatively annotating whether a metabolite is present in the sample. The starting point of the approach is a Bayesian clustering of peaks into groups, each corresponding to putative adducts and isotopes of a single metabolite.

resultsThe Bayesian modelling introduced here combines information from the mass-to-charge ratio, retention time and intensity of each peak, together with a model of the inter-peak dependency structure, to increase the accuracy of peak annotation. The results inherently contain a quantitative estimate of confidence in the peak annotations and allow an accurate trade-off between precision and recall. Extensive validation experiments using authentic chemical standards show that this system is able to produce more accurate putative identifications than other state-of-the-art systems, while at the same time giving a probabilistic measure of confidence in the annotations. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: The software has been implemented as part of the mzMatch metabolomics analysis pipeline, which is available for download at http://mzmatch.sourceforge.net/.

Indexed as

MetabolomicsAlgorithmsBayes TheoremChromatography, LiquidCluster AnalysisCysteic AcidData Interpretation, StatisticalMass SpectrometryNormal DistributionProbabilityReproducibility of ResultsSoftwareTriazolesCysteic AcidTriazoles

Identifiers

PMID24916385
PMCPMC4173012

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.