ReviewInternational journal of molecular sciences2024
A Workflow for Meaningful Interpretation of Classification Results from Handheld Ambient Mass Spectrometry Analysis Probes.
Review in International journal of molecular sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Picosecond infrared laser mass spectrometry for 10-second identification of lymphoproliferative imposter tumours in patient-derived xenografts.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- A molecular array for 10-second diagnosis of common spinal tumor types with picosecond infrared laser mass spectrometry.Neuro-oncology · 2025Article
- Application of rapid evaporative ionization mass spectrometry in preclinical and clinical analyses of steatotic liver tissues and cells.Scientific reports · 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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
While untargeted analysis of biological tissues with ambient mass spectrometry analysis probes has been widely reported in the literature, there are currently no guidelines to standardize the workflows for the experimental design, creation, and validation of molecular models that are utilized in these methods to perform class predictions. By drawing parallels with hurdles that are faced in the field of food fraud detection with untargeted mass spectrometry, we provide a stepwise workflow for the creation, refinement, evaluation, and assessment of the robustness of molecular models, aimed at meaningful interpretation of mass spectrometry-based tissue classification results. We propose strategies to obtain a sufficient number of samples for the creation of molecular models and discuss the potential overfitting of data, emphasizing both the need for model validation using an independent cohort of test samples, as well as the use of a fully characterized feature-based approach that verifies the biological relevance of the features that are used to avoid false discoveries. We additionally highlight the need to treat molecular models as "dynamic" and "living" entities and to further refine them as new knowledge concerning disease pathways and classifier feature noise becomes apparent in large(r) population studies. Where appropriate, we have provided a discussion of the challenges that we faced in our development of a 10 s cancer classification method using picosecond infrared laser mass spectrometry (PIRL-MS) to facilitate clinical decision-making at the bedside.
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.