ReviewMass spectrometry reviews2017
The arc of Mass Spectrometry Exchange Formats is long, but it bends toward HDF5.
Review in Mass spectrometry reviews, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Storing Mass-Spectrometry Data in Simple Databases Enables Flexible and Intuitive Exploration without Time or Space Penalties.Journal of proteome research · 2025Article
- MZA: A Data Conversion Tool to Facilitate Software Development and Artificial Intelligence Research in Multidimensional Mass Spectrometry.Journal of proteome research · 2023Article
- ptairMS: real-time processing and analysis of PTR-TOF-MS data for biomarker discovery in exhaled breath.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2022Article
- Spatially Resolved Mass Spectrometry at the Single Cell: Recent Innovations in Proteomics and Metabolomics.Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry · 2021Review
- AlphaTims: Indexing Trapped Ion Mobility Spectrometry-TOF Data for Fast and Easy Accession and Visualization.Molecular & cellular proteomics : MCP · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The evolution of data exchange in Mass Spectrometry spans decades and has ranged from human-readable text files representing individual scans or collections thereof (McDonald et al., 2004) through the official standard XML-based (Harold, Means, & Udemadu, 2005) data interchange standard (Deutsch, 2012), to increasingly compressed (Teleman et al., 2014) variants of this standard sometimes requiring purely binary adjunct files (Römpp et al., 2011). While the desire to maintain even partial human readability is understandable, the inherent mismatch between XML's textual and irregular format relative to the numeric and highly regular nature of actual spectral data, along with the explosive growth in dataset scales and the resulting need for efficient (binary and indexed) access has led to a phenomenon referred to as "technical drift" (Davis, 2013). While the drift is being continuously corrected using adjunct formats, compression schemes, and programs (Röst et al., 2015), we propose that the future of Mass Spectrometry Exchange Formats lies in the continued reliance and development of the PSI-MS (Mayer et al., 2014) controlled vocabulary, along with an expedited shift to an alternative, thriving and well-supported ecosystem for scientific data-exchange, storage, and access in binary form, namely that of HDF5 (Koranne, 2011). Indeed, pioneering efforts to leverage this universal, binary, and hierarchical data-format have already been published (Wilhelm et al., 2012; Rübel et al., 2013) though they have under-utilized self-description, a key property shared by HDF5 and XML. We demonstrate that a straightforward usage of plain ("vanilla") HDF5 yields immediate returns including, but not limited to, highly efficient data access, platform independent data viewers, a variety of libraries (Collette, 2014) for data retrieval and manipulation in many programming languages and remote data access through comprehensive RESTful data-servers. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Mass Spec Rev 36:668-673, 2017.
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.