Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38358530›Full record

ReviewAnalytical and bioanalytical chemistry2024

A critical evaluation of ultrasensitive single-cell proteomics strategies.

Mary Rachel Nalehua, Joseph Zaia

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. 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

2 authors.

Mary Rachel NalehuaBioinformatics Program, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA.
Joseph ZaiaBioinformatics Program, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA. jzaia@bu.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9497-8701

Funding

Selecting HA glycosylation for improved vaccine responsesR01AI155975 · NIAID · BOSTON UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CAMPUS · PI WAN, XIUFENG HENRY, WOODS, ROBERT J · 2021 to 2025
$4.0M
Cerebrovascular Remodeling and Neurodegenerative Changes in Alzheimer's DiseaseR01AG075876 · NIA · BOSTON UNIVERSITY (CHARLES RIVER CAMPUS) · PI Thor Stein, JOSEPH ZAIA · 2022 to 2026
$3.9M
Methods for measuring matrisome molecule similarity during disease processesR35GM144090 · NIGMS · BOSTON UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CAMPUS · PI JOSEPH ZAIA · 2022 to 2026
$2.1M
NIA NIH HHS R01 AG075876NIGMS NIH HHS R35 GM144090NIH HHS R01AI155975NIH HHS R35GM144090
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Success of mass spectrometry characterization of the proteome of single cells allows us to gain a greater understanding than afforded by transcriptomics alone but requires clear understanding of the tradeoffs between analytical throughput and precision. Recent advances in mass spectrometry acquisition techniques, including updated instrumentation and sample preparation, have improved the quality of peptide signals obtained from single cell data. However, much of the proteome remains uncharacterized, and higher throughput techniques often come at the expense of reduced sensitivity and coverage, which diminish the ability to measure proteoform heterogeneity, including splice variants and post-translational modifications, in single cell data analysis. Here, we assess the growing body of ultrasensitive single-cell approaches and their tradeoffs as researchers try to balance throughput and precision in their experiments.

Indexed as

ProteomeProteomicsMass SpectrometryPeptidesProtein Processing, Post-TranslationalPeptidesProteomeLaser microdissectionPhosphorylationPost-translational modificationProteoformSingle-cell proteomicsUltrasensitive proteomics

Identifiers

PMID38358530
PMCPMC12595597

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.