ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2024
Introducing 'identification probability' for automated and transferable assessment of metabolite identification confidence in metabolomics and related studies.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Methods for assessing compound identification confidence in metabolomics and related studies have been debated and actively researched for the past two decades. The earliest effort in 2007 focused primarily on mass spectrometry and nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy and resulted in four recommended levels of metabolite identification confidence - the Metabolite Standards Initiative (MSI) Levels. In 2014, the original MSI Levels were expanded to five levels (including two sublevels) to facilitate communication of compound identification confidence in high resolution mass spectrometry studies. Further refinement in identification levels have occurred, for example to accommodate use of ion mobility spectrometry in metabolomics workflows, and alternate approaches to communicate compound identification confidence also have been developed based on identification points schema. However, neither qualitative levels of identification confidence nor quantitative scoring systems address the degree of ambiguity in compound identifications in context of the chemical space being considered, are easily automated, or are transferable between analytical platforms. In this perspective, we propose that the metabolomics and related communities consider identification probability as an approach for automated and transferable assessment of compound identification and ambiguity in metabolomics and related studies. Identification probability is defined simply as 1/N, where N is the number of compounds in a reference library or chemical space that match to an experimentally measured molecule within user-defined measurement precision(s), for example mass measurement or retention time accuracy, etc. We demonstrate the utility of identification probability in an
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.