ReviewFrontiers in public health2026
AI redefine untargeted metabolomics: estimating chemical amounts for a Human Exposome Project.
Review in Frontiers in public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The data substrate of exposome intelligence: an interoperability profile for untargeted metabolomics.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The Human Exposome Project aims to map the totality of environmental exposures, but its success relies on transforming qualitative detections into quantitative data. Following our review on AI-driven metabolite identification, this second installment addresses the next critical bottleneck: estimating chemical concentrations in untargeted metabolomics without authentic standards. Translating LC-HRMS signal intensities into absolute concentrations is hindered by the vast variability in ionization efficiency and matrix effects, particularly for xenobiotics where reference standards are unavailable. We review emerging strategies that leverage artificial intelligence-ranging from descriptor-based regression to deep learning on molecular point clouds-to predict ionization response factors. We further evaluate a "matrix-embedded" calibration approach that utilizes ubiquitous endogenous metabolites (e.g., amino acids, lipids) as internal anchors to normalize response scales across studies. These innovations enable "tiered semi-quantification," allowing the classification of exposures into biologically relevant ranges (e.g., nanomolar vs. micromolar). This stratification facilitates direct integration with toxicological frameworks, such as the Threshold of Toxicological Concern (TTC) and high-throughput bioactivity data (e.g., ToxCast), for rapid risk prioritization. By integrating quantitative AI prediction models with robust quality assurance, untargeted metabolomics can evolve from a qualitative discovery tool into a quantitative engine for exposure science, providing the necessary evidence to link complex chemical exposures to human health outcomes.
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.