ArticleMetabolites2013
CASMI: And the Winner is . . .
Article in Metabolites, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 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
19 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of Compound Identification Tools Using Data Dependent and Data Independent High-Resolution Mass Spectrometry Spectra.Metabolites · 2023Article
- Empowering large chemical knowledge bases for exposomics: PubChemLite meets MetFrag.Journal of cheminformatics · 2021Article
- patRoon: open source software platform for environmental mass spectrometry based non-target screening.Journal of cheminformatics · 2021Article
- EPA's non-targeted analysis collaborative trial (ENTACT): genesis, design, and initial findings.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2019Article
- CASMI 2016: A manual approach for dereplication of natural products using tandem mass spectrometry.Phytochemistry letters · 2017Article
- From chromatogram to analyte to metabolite. How to pick horses for courses from the massive web resources for mass spectral plant metabolomics.GigaScience · 2017Review
- Critical Assessment of Small Molecule Identification 2016: automated methods.Journal of cheminformatics · 2017Article
- Trends in the application of high-resolution mass spectrometry for human biomonitoring: An analytical primer to studying the environmental chemical space of the human exposome.Environment international · 2017Review
- Bar Coding MS(2) Spectra for Metabolite Identification.Analytical chemistry · 2016Article
- MetFrag relaunched: incorporating strategies beyond in silico fragmentation.Journal of cheminformatics · 2016Article
- Many InChIs and quite some feat.Journal of computer-aided molecular design · 2015Article
- Using fragmentation trees and mass spectral trees for identifying unknown compounds in metabolomics.Trends in analytical chemistry : TRAC · 2015Article
- MS-DIAL: data-independent MS/MS deconvolution for comprehensive metabolome analysis.Nature methods · 2015Article
- MINEs: open access databases of computationally predicted enzyme promiscuity products for untargeted metabolomics.Journal of cheminformatics · 2015Article
- Solving CASMI 2013 with MetFrag, MetFusion and MOLGEN-MS/MS.Mass spectrometry (Tokyo, Japan) · 2014Article
- Winners of CASMI2013: Automated Tools and Challenge Data.Mass spectrometry (Tokyo, Japan) · 2014Article
- Tackling CASMI 2012: Solutions from MetFrag and MetFusion.Metabolites · 2013Article
- The Critical Assessment of Small Molecule Identification (CASMI): Challenges and Solutions.Metabolites · 2013Article
- Small Molecule Identification with MOLGEN and Mass Spectrometry.Metabolites · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Critical Assessment of Small Molecule Identification (CASMI) Contest was founded in 2012 to provide scientists with a common open dataset to evaluate their identification methods. In this review, we summarize the submissions, evaluate procedures and discuss the results. We received five submissions (three external, two internal) for LC-MS Category 1 (best molecular formula) and six submissions (three external, three internal) for LC-MS Category 2 (best molecular structure). No external submissions were received for the GC-MS Categories 3 and 4. The team of Dunn et al. from Birmingham had the most answers in the 1st place for Category 1, while Category 2 was won by H. Oberacher. Despite the low number of participants, the external and internal submissions cover a broad range of identification strategies, including expert knowledge, database searching, automated methods and structure generation. The results of Category 1 show that complementing automated strategies with (manual) expert knowledge was the most successful approach, while no automated method could compete with the power of spectral searching for Category 2-if the challenge was present in a spectral library. Every participant topped at least one challenge, showing that different approaches are still necessary for interpretation diversity.
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.