Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33231146›Full record

ReviewCurrent protein & peptide science2021

Characterization of Phosphorylated Proteins Using Mass Spectrometry.

Li-Rong Yu, Timothy D Veenstra

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current protein & peptide science, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 41% of its field
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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Proteomics of the heart.Physiological reviews · 2024
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. 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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Li-Rong YuDivision of Systems Biology, National Center for Toxicological Research, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, 3900 NCTR Road, Jefferson, AR 72079, United States.
Timothy D VeenstraSchool of Pharmacy, Cedarville University, 251 North Main Street, Cedarville, OH 45314, United States.
Cedarville University · USNational Center for Toxicological Research · US

Funding

Intramural FDA HHS FD999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Phosphorylation is arguably the most important post-translational modification that occurs within proteins. Phosphorylation is used as a signal to control numerous physiological activities ranging from gene expression to metabolism. Identifying phosphorylation sites within proteins was historically a challenge as it required either radioisotope labeling or the use of phospho-specific antibodies. The advent of mass spectrometry (MS) has had a major impact on the ability to qualitatively and quantitatively characterize phosphorylated proteins. In this article, we describe MS methods for characterizing phosphorylation sites within individual proteins as well as entire proteome samples. The utility of these methods is illustrated in examples that show the information that can be gained using these MS techniques.

Indexed as

Protein Processing, Post-TranslationalAmino Acid SequenceChromatography, AffinityChromatography, LiquidHumansPeptide MappingPhosphopeptidesPhosphoproteinsPhosphorylationProteomeProteomicsTandem Mass SpectrometryPhosphopeptidesPhosphoproteinsProteomeimmobilized metal affinity chromatography (IMAC)mass spectrometrymetal oxide affinity chromatography (MOAC)peptide mappingphosphoproteomicsPhosphorylationtandem mass spectrometry (MS2)

Identifiers

PMID33231146
PMCPMC8463256
OpenAlexW3108571271

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.