ArticleBioinformatics (Oxford, England)2023
Neither random nor censored: estimating intensity-dependent probabilities for missing values in label-free proteomics.
Article in Bioinformatics (Oxford, England), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- msBayesImpute as a versatile framework for addressing missing values in biomedical mass spectrometry proteomics data.Communications chemistry · 2026Article
- JUMPlion improves quantitative DIA proteomics through ion-level recovery of missing values.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Comparative Proteomic Profiling of ClinicalJournal of extracellular biology · 2026Article
- Spatial protein expression patterns across pathologically-associated fibers revealed molecular specialization in inclusion body myositis.Cell communication and signaling : CCS · 2026Article
- Association between Urinary-Extracellular-Vesicle-Enriched Proteome Dynamics and Oncological Outcomes Following Concurrent Chemoradiation in Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2026Article
- Proteomics Data Imputation With a Deep Model That Learns From Many Datasets.Molecular & cellular proteomics : MCP · 2025Article
- scplainer: using linear models to understand mass spectrometry-based single-cell proteomics data.Genome biology · 2025Article
- Improved quantitative accuracy in data-independent acquisition proteomics via retention time boundary imputation.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Evaluation of imputation and imputation-free strategies for differential abundance analysis in metaproteomics data.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2025Article
- Proteomic Profiling Towards a Better Understanding of Genetic Based Muscular Diseases: The Current Picture and a Look to the Future.Biomolecules · 2025Review
- Embracing the informative missingness and silent gene in analyzing biologically diverse samples.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- ABDS: a bioinformatics tool suite for analyzing biologically diverse samples.Research square · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
motivationMass spectrometry proteomics is a powerful tool in biomedical research but its usefulness is limited by the frequent occurrence of missing values in peptides that cannot be reliably quantified (detected) for particular samples. Many analysis strategies have been proposed for missing values where the discussion often focuses on distinguishing whether values are missing completely at random (MCAR), missing at random (MAR) or missing not at random (MNAR).
resultsStatistical models and algorithms are proposed for estimating the detection probabilities and for evaluating how much statistical information can or cannot be recovered from the missing value pattern. The probability that an intensity is detected is shown to be accurately modeled as a logit-linear function of the underlying intensity, showing that missing value process is intermediate between MAR and censoring. The detection probability asymptotes to 100% for high intensities, showing that missing values unrelated to intensity are rare. The rule applies globally to each dataset and is appropriate for both high and lowly expressed peptides. A probability model is developed that allows the distribution of unobserved intensities to be inferred from the observed values. The detection probability model is incorporated into a likelihood-based approach for assessing differential expression and successfully recovers statistical power compared to omitting the missing values from the analysis. In contrast, imputation methods are shown to perform poorly, either reducing statistical power or increasing the false discovery rate to unacceptable levels. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: Data and code to reproduce the results shown in this article are available from https://mengbo-li.github.io/protDP/.
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.