ArticleMetabolomics : Official journal of the Metabolomic Society2026
Integrated workflow for univariate and multivariate evaluation of batch correction reliability.
Article in Metabolomics : Official journal of the Metabolomic Society, 2026. 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAssessing batch correction methods remains a major challenge in metabolomics, as no consensus currently exists for a generic and reliable evaluation strategy. Given the strong influence of batch effects on downstream statistical analyses, establishing a robust framework for their assessment is crucial to ensure result reproducibility and validity.
methodsThis study presents a comprehensive workflow that combines innovative numerical indicators and diagnostic plots to assess multiple dimensions of batch correction performance. It relies on a newly developed indicator, the Batch Conformity Index (BCI), a multivariate, covariance-aware metric quantifying within- and between-batch variability. Complementary visualization tools, including single and multiblock factorization methods, hierarchical clustering and convex hull representations, provide interpretable global diagnostics. These are complemented by compound-level analyses employing classical univariate metrics such as the coefficient of variation, and intra/inter-batch dispersion indices. The workflow also integrates chemistry-based validation via isotopic ratio consistency to ensure that corrections preserve true biochemical information, enabling the detection of potential overfitting or overcorrection.
resultsThe benefits offered by the proposed strategy were illustrated by comparing two widely used correction methods, i.e. LOESS and ComBat, applied to a large-scale serum metabolomics dataset. The results highlighted the complementary strengths and limitations of each method, successfully captured by the proposed workflow, thus providing an objective and interpretable basis for method evaluation.
conclusionThe developed framework offers a unified strategy for evaluating batch correction reliability across multivariate, univariate, and chemical dimensions, representing a significant step toward standardized and reproducible metabolomics data harmonization.
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.