ArticleJournal of proteome research2021
Improved Discrimination of Disease States Using Proteomics Data with the Updated Aristotle Classifier.
Article in Journal of proteome research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Feature Down-Selection to Improve Supervised Classification by Machine Learning on Mass Spectrometry Imaging Data.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Exploring Sample Storage Conditions for the Mass Spectrometric Analysis of Extracted Lipids from Latent Fingerprints.Biomolecules · 2025Article
- Skin Surface Sebum Analysis by ESI-MS.Biomolecules · 2024Review
- Workflow for Evaluating Normalization Tools for Omics Data Using Supervised and Unsupervised Machine Learning.Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry · 2023Article
- Distinguishing academic science writing from humans or ChatGPT with over 99% accuracy using off-the-shelf machine learning tools.Cell reports. Physical science · 2023Article
- Advances, obstacles, and opportunities for machine learning in proteomics.Cell reports. Physical science · 2022Article
- How (Not) to Generate a Highly Predictive Biomarker Panel Using Machine Learning.Journal of proteome research · 2022Review
- Exposing the Brain Proteomic Signatures of Alzheimer's Disease in Diverse Racial Groups: Leveraging Multiple Data Sets and Machine Learning.Journal of proteome research · 2022Article
- LC-MS peak assignment based on unanimous selection by six machine learning algorithms.Scientific reports · 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Mass spectrometry data sets from omics studies are an optimal information source for discriminating patients with disease and identifying biomarkers. Thousands of proteins or endogenous metabolites can be queried in each analysis, spanning several orders of magnitude in abundance. Machine learning tools that effectively leverage these data to accurately identify disease states are in high demand. While mass spectrometry data sets are rich with potentially useful information, using the data effectively can be challenging because of missing entries in the data sets and because the number of samples is typically much smaller than the number of features, two challenges that make machine learning difficult. To address this problem, we have modified a new supervised classification tool, the Aristotle Classifier, so that omics data sets can be better leveraged for identifying disease states. The optimized classifier, AC.2021, is benchmarked on multiple data sets against its predecessor and two leading supervised classification tools, Support Vector Machine (SVM) and XGBoost. The new classifier, AC.2021, outperformed existing tools on multiple tests using proteomics data. The underlying code for the classifier, provided herein, would be useful for researchers who desire improved classification accuracy when using their omics data sets to identify disease states.
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.