ArticlePloS one2024
A cautionary tale about properly vetting datasets used in supervised learning predicting metabolic pathway involvement.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- High-Quality Predicted Metabolite-Pathway Annotations Expand Pathway Coverage and Increase Enriched Pathway Detection Across Metabolomics Datasets.Metabolites · 2026Article
- Article
- Structural divergence of lentinula edodes polysaccharides is associated with distinct anti-hyperuricemia pathways.NPJ science of food · 2026Article
- Predicting the pathway involvement of metabolites annotated in the MetaCyc knowledgebase.BMC bioinformatics · 2026Article
- Chemical representation standardization needed to generalize metabolic pathway involvement prediction across the Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes, Reactome, and MetaCyc knowledgebases.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Predicting the Pathway Involvement of Compounds Annotated in the Reactome Knowledgebase.Metabolites · 2025Article
- Predicting the Pathway Involvement of All Pathway and Associated Compound Entries Defined in the Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes.Metabolites · 2024Article
- Predicting the Association of Metabolites with Both Pathway Categories and Individual Pathways.Metabolites · 2024Article
- Predicting the Pathway Involvement of Metabolites in Both Pathway Categories and Individual Pathways.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
- Predicting the Pathway Involvement of Metabolites Based on Combined Metabolite and Pathway Features.Metabolites · 2024Article
- Predicting The Pathway Involvement Of Metabolites Based on Combined Metabolite and Pathway Features.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
- Benchmark Dataset for Training Machine Learning Models to Predict the Pathway Involvement of Metabolites.Metabolites · 2023Article
- Benchmark dataset for training machine learning models to predict the pathway involvement of metabolites.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The mapping of metabolite-specific data to pathways within cellular metabolism is a major data analysis step needed for biochemical interpretation. A variety of machine learning approaches, particularly deep learning approaches, have been used to predict these metabolite-to-pathway mappings, utilizing a training dataset of known metabolite-to-pathway mappings. A few such training datasets have been derived from the Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG). However, several prior published machine learning approaches utilized an erroneous KEGG-derived training dataset that used SMILES molecular representations strings (KEGG-SMILES dataset) and contained a sizable proportion (~26%) duplicate entries. The presence of so many duplicates taint the training and testing sets generated from k-fold cross-validation of the KEGG-SMILES dataset. Therefore, the k-fold cross-validation performance of the resulting machine learning models was grossly inflated by the erroneous presence of these duplicate entries. Here we describe and evaluate the KEGG-SMILES dataset so that others may avoid using it. We also identify the prior publications that utilized this erroneous KEGG-SMILES dataset so their machine learning results can be properly and critically evaluated. In addition, we demonstrate the reduction of model k-fold cross-validation (CV) performance after de-duplicating the KEGG-SMILES dataset. This is a cautionary tale about properly vetting prior published benchmark datasets before using them in machine learning approaches. We hope others will avoid similar mistakes.
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.