ArticleBriefings in bioinformatics2024
Bayesian functional analysis for untargeted metabolomics data with matching uncertainty and small sample sizes.
Article in Briefings in bioinformatics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A priori sample size determination and power analysis in metabolic phenotyping and integrative metabolomics: an application framework based on a systematic review of literature.Metabolomics : Official journal of the Metabolomic Society · 2026Pooled it
- Exploring the Comorbidity Mechanism of Internet Addiction, Insomnia, Depression, and Suicidality Among Chinese College Students Through Network Analysis.Alpha psychiatry · 2026Article
- Lipid Class Prediction from MS1 Data using Gaussian Graphical Models.Analytical chemistry · 2026Article
- A machine learning framework for classifying lipids in untargeted metabolomics using mass-to-charge ratios and retention times.Metabolomics : Official journal of the Metabolomic Society · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Untargeted metabolomics based on liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry technology is quickly gaining widespread application, given its ability to depict the global metabolic pattern in biological samples. However, the data are noisy and plagued by the lack of clear identity of data features measured from samples. Multiple potential matchings exist between data features and known metabolites, while the truth can only be one-to-one matches. Some existing methods attempt to reduce the matching uncertainty, but are far from being able to remove the uncertainty for most features. The existence of the uncertainty causes major difficulty in downstream functional analysis. To address these issues, we develop a novel approach for Bayesian Analysis of Untargeted Metabolomics data (BAUM) to integrate previously separate tasks into a single framework, including matching uncertainty inference, metabolite selection and functional analysis. By incorporating the knowledge graph between variables and using relatively simple assumptions, BAUM can analyze datasets with small sample sizes. By allowing different confidence levels of feature-metabolite matching, the method is applicable to datasets in which feature identities are partially known. Simulation studies demonstrate that, compared with other existing methods, BAUM achieves better accuracy in selecting important metabolites that tend to be functionally consistent and assigning confidence scores to feature-metabolite matches. We analyze a COVID-19 metabolomics dataset and a mouse brain metabolomics dataset using BAUM. Even with a very small sample size of 16 mice per group, BAUM is robust and stable. It finds pathways that conform to existing knowledge, as well as novel pathways that are biologically plausible.
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.