Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31529404›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry2019

Chemometric Strategies for Sensitive Annotation and Validation of Anatomical Regions of Interest in Complex Imaging Mass Spectrometry Data.

Patrick M Wehrli, Wojciech Michno, Kaj Blennow, Henrik Zetterberg, Jörg Hanrieder

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Evaluation of normalization strategies for mass spectrometry-based multi-omics datasets.Metabolomics : Official journal of the Metabolomic Society · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Batch Effects in MALDI Mass Spectrometry Imaging.Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry · 2021
    Article
  12. 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

5 authors.

Patrick M WehrliDepartment of Psychiatry and Neurochemistry, Sahlgrenska Academy at the University of Gothenburg, Sahlgrenska University Hospital Mölndal, Mölndal, Sweden.
Wojciech MichnoDepartment of Psychiatry and Neurochemistry, Sahlgrenska Academy at the University of Gothenburg, Sahlgrenska University Hospital Mölndal, Mölndal, Sweden.
Kaj BlennowDepartment of Psychiatry and Neurochemistry, Sahlgrenska Academy at the University of Gothenburg, Sahlgrenska University Hospital Mölndal, Mölndal, Sweden.
Henrik ZetterbergDepartment of Psychiatry and Neurochemistry, Sahlgrenska Academy at the University of Gothenburg, Sahlgrenska University Hospital Mölndal, Mölndal, Sweden.
Jörg HanriederDepartment of Psychiatry and Neurochemistry, Sahlgrenska Academy at the University of Gothenburg, Sahlgrenska University Hospital Mölndal, Mölndal, Sweden. jh@gu.se.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6059-198X

Funding

European Research Council 681712Vetenskapsrådet 2018-02181
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Imaging mass spectrometry (IMS) is a promising new chemical imaging modality that generates a large body of complex imaging data, which in turn can be approached using multivariate analysis approaches for image analysis and segmentation. Processing IMS raw data is critically important for proper data interpretation and has significant effects on the outcome of data analysis, in particular statistical modeling. Commonly, data processing methods are chosen based on rational motivations rather than comparative metrics, though no quantitative measures to assess and compare processing options have been suggested. We here present a data processing and analysis pipeline for IMS data interrogation, processing and ROI annotation, segmentation, and validation. This workflow includes (1) objective evaluation of processing methods for IMS datasets based on multivariate analysis using PCA. This was then followed by (2) ROI annotation and classification through region-based active contours (AC) segmentation based on the PCA component scores matrix. This provided class information for subsequent (3) OPLS-DA modeling to evaluate IMS data processing based on the quality metrics of their respective multivariate models and for robust quantification of ROI-specific signal localization. This workflow provides an unbiased strategy for sensitive annotation of anatomical regions of interest combined with quantitative comparison of processing procedures for multivariate analysis allowing robust ROI annotation and quantification of the associated molecular histology.

Indexed as

Active contour segmentation (ACS)Data processingImage segmentationImaging mass spectrometry (IMS)Multivariate data analysis (MVA)Regions of interest (ROIs)

Identifiers

PMID31529404
PMCPMC6828630

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.