ReviewMolecules (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Mass Spectrometry-Based Evaluation of the Bland-Altman Approach: Review, Discussion, and Proposal.
Review in Molecules (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Accuracy and agreement of three blood-loss estimation methods versus the HbMass method for assessing blood loss during PLIF.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2026Article
- Tracking the Migratory Life History of Brown Croaker (Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Article
- Feasibility of the dynamic EIT technique for non-invasive monitoring of V/Q: a preliminary study.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- rtmsEcho: An Open-Source R Package for Automated Analysis of Acoustic Ejection Mass Spectrometry Data.Analytical chemistry · 2025Article
- Perspectives of Quantitative GC-MS, LC-MS, and ICP-MS in the Clinical Medicine Science-The Role of Analytical Chemistry.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Application of the Bland-Altman and Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) Approaches to Study Isotope Effects in Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry Analysis of Human Plasma, Serum and Urine Samples.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Reliable quantification in biological systems of endogenous low- and high-molecular substances, drugs and their metabolites, is of particular importance in diagnosis and therapy, and in basic and clinical research. The analytical characteristics of analytical approaches have many differences, including in core features such as accuracy, precision, specificity, and limits of detection (LOD) and quantitation (LOQ). Several different mathematic approaches were developed and used for the comparison of two analytical methods applied to the same chemical compound in the same biological sample. Generally, comparisons of results obtained by two analytical methods yields different quantitative results. Yet, which mathematical approach gives the most reliable results? Which mathematical approach is best suited to demonstrate agreement between the methods, or the superiority of an analytical method A over analytical method B? The simplest and most frequently used method of comparison is the linear regression analysis of data observed by method A (
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.