ArticleProteomes2016
A Quantitative Proteomics Approach to Clinical Research with Non-Traditional Samples.
Article in Proteomes, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Qualitative and Quantitative Mass Spectrometry in Salivary Metabolomics and Proteomics.Metabolites · 2023Review
- Mass spectrometry-based tear proteomics for noninvasive biomarker discovery.Mass spectrometry reviews · 2022Review
- New frontiers on the molecular underpinnings of hypospadias according to severity.Arab journal of urology · 2020Review
- Article
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 proper handling of samples to be analyzed by mass spectrometry (MS) can guarantee excellent results and a greater depth of analysis when working in quantitative proteomics. This is critical when trying to assess non-traditional sources such as ear wax, saliva, vitreous humor, aqueous humor, tears, nipple aspirate fluid, breast milk/colostrum, cervical-vaginal fluid, nasal secretions, bronco-alveolar lavage fluid, and stools. We intend to provide the investigator with relevant aspects of quantitative proteomics and to recognize the most recent clinical research work conducted with atypical samples and analyzed by quantitative proteomics. Having as reference the most recent and different approaches used with non-traditional sources allows us to compare new strategies in the development of novel experimental models. On the other hand, these references help us to contribute significantly to the understanding of the proportions of proteins in different proteomes of clinical interest and may lead to potential advances in the emerging field of precision medicine.
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.