Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41959525›Full record

ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2026

Classification with Missing Data - A

Alyssa A Nitz, Blake McGee, Benjamin Echarry, Samuel H Payne

Abstract readPreprint
In one paragraph

Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Alyssa A NitzDepartment of Biology, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah, USA.
Blake McGeeDepartment of Biology, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah, USA.
Benjamin EcharryDepartment of Biology, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah, USA.
Samuel H PayneDepartment of Biology, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8351-1994

Funding

Enhanced Sensitivity and Quantitative Precision for Single Cell ProteomicsR01GM147653 · NIGMS · BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY · PI PAYNE, SAMUEL H, SHORTREED, MICHAEL R · 2022 to 2025
$1.6M
NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM147653
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Single-cell proteomics (SCP) is uniquely suited for cell-type characterization, trajectory-based inference, and microenvironment mapping. Evaluating biological hypotheses in these experiments requires labeled cells. Without a pre-measurement label, machine learning is used to identify features that characterize the cell types and classify unlabeled samples. Current implementations of annotation methods come with several statistical and computational disadvantages. First, machine-learning methods require complete data, leading to large amounts of missing-value imputation in SCP. Additionally, some machine-learning methods select features and classify samples via cross-sample comparisons, nullifying downstream cross-sample comparisons, like differential expression, through double dipping. Finally, measurements from different proteomic experiments are not directly comparable due to batch effects, significantly limiting the accuracy of classifiers trained on external data. Here we present NIFty, a top-scoring pairs based feature selection method, implemented in a full classification pipeline, that does not require pre-imputed data as input or employ circular analysis techniques, and overcomes batch effects without batch correction. When tested on imputed vs unimputed data, data with large batch effects, and multiclass data, NIFty successfully overcame the targeted classification challenges and comparably, or more accurately, classified the samples in the varied datasets.

Identifiers

PMID41959525
PMCPMC13061006

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.