ArticleMetabolites2022
A Comparison of Solvent-Based Extraction Methods to Assess the Central Carbon Metabolites in Mouse Bone and Muscle.
Article in Metabolites, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Systematic Comparison of Bone Proteome Extraction Methods to Allow for Integrated Proteomics-Metabolomics Correlation.Journal of proteome research · 2025Article
- Comparing the Extraction Performance in Mouse Plasma of Different Biphasic Methods for Polar and Nonpolar Compounds.Journal of proteome research · 2024Article
- Enhanced molecular release from elderly bone samples using collagenase I: insights into fatty acid metabolism alterations.Journal of translational medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The identification of endogenous metabolites has great potential for understanding the underlying tissue processes occurring in either a homeostatic or a diseased state. The application of gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS)-based metabolomics on musculoskeletal tissue samples has gained traction. However, limited comparison studies exist evaluating the sensitivity, reproducibility, and robustness of the various existing extraction protocols for musculoskeletal tissues. Here, we evaluated polar metabolite extraction from bone and muscle of mouse origin. The extraction methods compared were (1) modified Bligh-Dyer (mBD), (2) low chloroform (CHCl
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.