ArticleAnalytical and bioanalytical chemistry2024
Improving predictions of compound amenability for liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry to enhance non-targeted analysis.
Article 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 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Quantitative method comparison in non-targeted analysis using cascade classification.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2026Article
- Machine Learning-Enhanced LC-HRMS Workflows for Suspect and Nontargeted Screening of Pesticide Residues in Fruits and Vegetables.Analytical chemistry · 2026Article
- Review
- Practical Guidance on Selecting Analytical Methods for PFAS in Semiconductor Manufacturing Wastewater.ACS measurement science au · 2025Review
- Reference library for suspect screening of environmental toxicants using ion mobility spectrometry-mass spectrometry.Communications chemistry · 2025Article
- CombinedJournal of chemical information and modeling · 2025Article
- Filling the Gaps in PFAS Detection: Integrating GC-MS Non-Targeted Analysis for Comprehensive Environmental Monitoring and Exposure Assessment.Environmental science & technology letters · 2025Article
- Analytical Quality Evaluation of the Tox21 Compound Library.Chemical research in toxicology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Mass-spectrometry-based non-targeted analysis (NTA), in which mass spectrometric signals are assigned chemical identities based on a systematic collation of evidence, is a growing area of interest for toxicological risk assessment. Successful NTA results in better identification of potentially hazardous pollutants within the environment, facilitating the development of targeted analytical strategies to best characterize risks to human and ecological health. A supporting component of the NTA process involves assessing whether suspected chemicals are amenable to the mass spectrometric method, which is necessary in order to assign an observed signal to the chemical structure. Prior work from this group involved the development of a random forest model for predicting the amenability of 5517 unique chemical structures to liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (LC-MS). This work improves the interpretability of the group's prior model of the same endpoint, as well as integrating 1348 more data points across negative and positive ionization modes. We enhance interpretability by feature engineering, a machine learning practice that reduces the input dimensionality while attempting to preserve performance statistics. We emphasize the importance of interpretable machine learning models within the context of building confidence in NTA identification. The novel data were curated by the labeling of compounds as amenable or unamenable by expert curators, resulting in an enhanced set of chemical compounds to expand the applicability domain of the prior model. The balanced accuracy benchmark of the newly developed model is comparable to performance previously reported (mean CV BA is 0.84 vs. 0.82 in positive mode, and 0.85 vs. 0.82 in negative mode), while on a novel external set, derived from this work's data, the Matthews correlation coefficients (MCC) for the novel models are 0.66 and 0.68 for positive and negative mode, respectively. Our group's prior published models scored MCC of 0.55 and 0.54 on the same external sets. This demonstrates appreciable improvement over the chemical space captured by the expanded dataset. This work forms part of our ongoing efforts to develop models with higher interpretability and higher performance to support NTA efforts.
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.