Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25692071›Full record

ReviewJournal of analytical methods in chemistry2015

Solid-phase extraction strategies to surmount body fluid sample complexity in high-throughput mass spectrometry-based proteomics.

Marco R Bladergroen, Yuri E M van der Burgt

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of analytical methods in chemistry, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing 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

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Bottom-Up Proteomics: Advancements in Sample Preparation.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Review
  9. A review of the modern principles and applications of solid-phase extraction techniques in chromatographic analysis.Analytical sciences : the international journal of the Japan Society for Analytical Chemistry · 2022
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

2 authors.

Marco R BladergroenLeiden University Medical Center (LUMC), Center for Proteomics and Metabolomics, P.O. Box 9600, 2300 RC Leiden, Netherlands.
Yuri E M van der BurgtLeiden University Medical Center (LUMC), Center for Proteomics and Metabolomics, P.O. Box 9600, 2300 RC Leiden, Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

For large-scale and standardized applications in mass spectrometry- (MS-) based proteomics automation of each step is essential. Here we present high-throughput sample preparation solutions for balancing the speed of current MS-acquisitions and the time needed for analytical workup of body fluids. The discussed workflows reduce body fluid sample complexity and apply for both bottom-up proteomics experiments and top-down protein characterization approaches. Various sample preparation methods that involve solid-phase extraction (SPE) including affinity enrichment strategies have been automated. Obtained peptide and protein fractions can be mass analyzed by direct infusion into an electrospray ionization (ESI) source or by means of matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization (MALDI) without further need of time-consuming liquid chromatography (LC) separations.

Identifiers

PMID25692071
PMCPMC4322654

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.