Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29275246›Full record

ReviewCurrent opinion in chemical biology2018

Advances in mass spectrometry imaging coupled to ion mobility spectrometry for enhanced imaging of biological tissues.

Marta Sans, Clara L Feider, Livia S Eberlin

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current opinion in chemical biology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 51 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
51citing 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

51 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Broadband Collision-Induced Dissociation Mass Spectrometry Imaging.Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Emerging Computational Methods in Mass Spectrometry Imaging.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2022
    Review
  20. Review
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

3 authors.

Marta SansDepartment of Chemistry, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX 78712, United States.
Clara L FeiderDepartment of Chemistry, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX 78712, United States.
Livia S EberlinDepartment of Chemistry, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX 78712, United States. Electronic address: liviase@utexas.edu.

Funding

Mass Spectrometry Imaging for Clinical Diagnosis and Prognosis of Human CancersR00CA190783 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN · PI SCHIAVINATO EBERLIN, LIVIA · 2016 to 2018
$677k
NCI NIH HHS R00 CA190783
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Tissues present complex biochemical and morphological composition associated with their various cell types and physiological functions. Mass spectrometry (MS) imaging technologies are powerful tools to investigate the molecular information from biological tissue samples and visualize their complex spatial distributions. Coupling of gas-phase ion mobility spectrometry (IMS) technologies to MS imaging has been increasingly explored to improve performance for biological tissue imaging. This approach allows improved detection of low abundance ions and separation of isobaric molecular species, thus resulting in more accurate determination of the spatial distribution of molecular ions. In this review, we highlight recent advances in the field focusing on promising applications of these technologies for metabolite, lipid and protein tissue imaging.

Indexed as

Biomedical ResearchIon Mobility SpectrometryLipidsMass SpectrometryProteinsLipidsProteins

Identifiers

PMID29275246
PMCPMC5828985

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.