ArticleACS omega2024
A Comparison of Bottom-Up Proteomic Sample Preparation Methods for the Human Parasite
Article in ACS omega, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bark beetle (Frontiers in plant science · 2026Article
- Proteomic, Fatty Acid and Mineral Profiles of PDO Arouquesa and Commercial Crossbred Beefs: A Tool for Certification.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Article
- Host-specific targets of Histomonas meleagridis antigens revealed by immunoprecipitation.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- The proteomic landscape ofFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Bottom-up proteomic approaches depend on the efficient digestion of proteins into peptides for mass spectrometric analysis. Sample preparation strategies, based on magnetic beads, filter-aided systems, or in-solution digests, are commonly used for proteomic analysis. Time-intensive methods like filter-aided sample preparation (FASP) have led to the development of new, more time-efficient filter-based strategies like suspension trappings (S-Traps) or magnetic bead-based strategies like SP3. S-Traps have been reported as an alternative proteomic sample preparation method as they allow for high sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) concentrations to be present in the sample. In this study, we compare the efficiency of different protocols for FASP, SP3, and S-Trap-based digestion of proteins after extraction from
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.