ArticleJournal of proteomics2015
Benchmark study of automatic annotation of MALDI-TOF N-glycan profiles.
Article in Journal of proteomics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- L-Fucose: a dietary sugar with multifaceted potential in the biology and therapy of cancer.Nature reviews. Cancer · 2026Review
- High-Throughput Glycomic Methods.Chemical reviews · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Human experts can annotate peaks in MALDI-TOF profiles of detached N-glycans with some degree of accuracy. Even though MALDI-TOF profiles give only intact masses without any fragmentation information, expert knowledge of the most common glycans and biosynthetic pathways in the biological system can point to a small set of most likely glycan structures at the "cartoon" level of detail. Cartoonist is a recently developed, fully automatic annotation tool for MALDI-TOF glycan profiles. Here we benchmark Cartoonist's automatic annotations against human expert annotations on human and mouse N-glycan data from the Consortium for Functional Glycomics. We find that Cartoonist and expert annotations largely agree, but the expert tends to annotate more specifically, meaning fewer suggested structures per peak, and Cartoonist more comprehensively, meaning more annotated peaks. On peaks for which both Cartoonist and the expert give unique cartoons, the two cartoons agree in over 90% of all cases. This article is part of a Special Issue entitled: Computational Proteomics.
Indexed as
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.