Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36078061›Full record

ReviewCells2022

An Optimized Comparative Proteomic Approach as a Tool in Neurodegenerative Disease Research.

Rachel A Kline, Lena Lößlein, Dominic Kurian, Judit Aguilar Martí, Samantha L Eaton, Felipe A Court, Thomas H Gillingwater, Thomas M Wishart

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cells, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. 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

8 authors.

Rachel A KlineThe Roslin Institute, Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies, The University of Edinburgh, Easter Bush Campus, Midlothian EH25 9RG, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-1692-2208
Lena LößleinSection of Developmental Neurobiology, Department of Neurology, University Hospital Würzburg, 97080 Würzburg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-5705-9175
Dominic KurianThe Roslin Institute, Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies, The University of Edinburgh, Easter Bush Campus, Midlothian EH25 9RG, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-5924-665X
Judit Aguilar MartíThe Roslin Institute, Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies, The University of Edinburgh, Easter Bush Campus, Midlothian EH25 9RG, UK.
Samantha L EatonThe Roslin Institute, Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies, The University of Edinburgh, Easter Bush Campus, Midlothian EH25 9RG, UK.
Felipe A CourtCenter for Integrative Biology, Faculty of Sciences, Universidad Mayor, Santiago 8580745, Chile.ORCID 0000-0002-9394-7601
Thomas H GillingwaterThe Euan MacDonald Centre for Motor Neuron Disease Research, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh EH9 9AG, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-0306-5577
Thomas M WishartThe Roslin Institute, Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies, The University of Edinburgh, Easter Bush Campus, Midlothian EH25 9RG, UK.

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BBS/E/E/10002071
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent advances in proteomic technologies now allow unparalleled assessment of the molecular composition of a wide range of sample types. However, the application of such technologies and techniques should not be undertaken lightly. Here, we describe why the design of a proteomics experiment itself is only the first step in yielding high-quality, translatable results. Indeed, the effectiveness and/or impact of the majority of contemporary proteomics screens are hindered not by commonly considered technical limitations such as low proteome coverage but rather by insufficient analyses. Proteomic experimentation requires a careful methodological selection to account for variables from sample collection, through to database searches for peptide identification to standardised post-mass spectrometry options directed analysis workflow, which should be adjusted for each study, from determining when and how to filter proteomic data to choosing holistic versus trend-wise analyses for biologically relevant patterns. Finally, we highlight and discuss the difficulties inherent in the modelling and study of the majority of progressive neurodegenerative conditions. We provide evidence (in the context of neurodegenerative research) for the benefit of undertaking a comparative approach through the application of the above considerations in the alignment of publicly available pre-existing data sets to identify potential novel regulators of neuronal stability.

Indexed as

Neurodegenerative DiseasesProteomicsHumansMass SpectrometryProteomeProteomedata filteringexperimental designneurodegenerationpathway analysisproteomicssystems biology

Identifiers

PMID36078061
PMCPMC9454658

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.