Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37999335›Full record

ReviewEssays in biochemistry2024

Computational methods for processing and interpreting mass spectrometry-based metabolomics.

Leonardo Perez de Souza, Alisdair R Fernie

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Essays in biochemistry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. LC-Triple Quadrupole MS Enables Sample Classification inJournal of analytical methods in chemistry · 2026
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Metabolomic analysis ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2025
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Evolution of plant metabolism: the state-of-the-art.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2024
    Review
  12. Cell-Death Metabolites fromMarine drugs · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
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

2 authors.

Leonardo Perez de SouzaMax Planck Institute of Molecular Plant Physiology, Am Mühlenberg 1, 14476 Potsdam-Golm, Germany.
Alisdair R FernieMax Planck Institute of Molecular Plant Physiology, Am Mühlenberg 1, 14476 Potsdam-Golm, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-9000-335X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Metabolomics has emerged as an indispensable tool for exploring complex biological questions, providing the ability to investigate a substantial portion of the metabolome. However, the vast complexity and structural diversity intrinsic to metabolites imposes a great challenge for data analysis and interpretation. Liquid chromatography mass spectrometry (LC-MS) stands out as a versatile technique offering extensive metabolite coverage. In this mini-review, we address some of the hurdles posed by the complex nature of LC-MS data, providing a brief overview of computational tools designed to help tackling these challenges. Our focus centers on two major steps that are essential to most metabolomics investigations: the translation of raw data into quantifiable features, and the extraction of structural insights from mass spectra to facilitate metabolite identification. By exploring current computational solutions, we aim at providing a critical overview of the capabilities and constraints of mass spectrometry-based metabolomics, while introduce some of the most recent trends in data processing and analysis within the field.

Indexed as

Mass SpectrometryMetabolomicsAnimalsChromatography, LiquidComputational BiologyHumansMetabolomebioinformaticsmachine learningmass spectrometrymetabolomics

Identifiers

PMID37999335
PMCPMC11065554

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.