Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42680977›Full record

ArticleMethods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.)2026

Metabolomics Data Analysis with TIGER.

Rui Wang-Sattler, Siyu Han

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.), 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

2 authors.

Rui Wang-SattlerInstitute of Translational Genomics, Helmholtz Zentrum München, German Research Center for Environmental Health, Neuherberg, Germany. rui.wang-sattler@helmholtz-munich.de.
Siyu HanInstitute of Translational Genomics, Helmholtz Zentrum München, German Research Center for Environmental Health, Neuherberg, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

TIGER, a non-parametric method, was developed to address technical variations (e.g., plate and batch effects) in targeted and non-targeted metabolomics datasets. It integrates the random forest (RF) algorithm into a flexible ensemble learning framework, combining multiple base models with a meta-model. These base models are trained using diverse RF hyperparameter combinations, eliminating the need for manual hyperparameter tuning. This chapter highlights practical considerations for using TIGER effectively, including incorporating quality control (QC) samples into study design. When QCs are unavailable, randomly selected samples can be remeasured to facilitate cross-kit corrections. To optimize processing time, highly correlated metabolites from QC samples are selected to train the base models, with weights assigned via an exponential decay function. TIGER employs relative standard deviation (RSD) and mean absolute percentage error (MAPE) as key metrics to ensure models generalize well to unseen data while avoiding overfitting. Additionally, the developed dynamic website has been demonstrated with raw and TIGER-normalized data, enabling performance evaluation and visualization of longitudinal patterns of metabolites or metabolite ratios. This platform demonstrates TIGER's ability to accurately normalize data and uncover trends across three time points spanning a decade. With its proper application, TIGER stands to be a powerful tool for metabolomics studies.

Indexed as

MetabolomeMetabolomicsSoftwareAlgorithmsAnimalsData AnalysisQuality ControlRandom ForestBatch correctionCross-kit correctionData-preprocessingMetabolomicsML algorithmsNon-targeted metabolomicsTargeted metabolomics

Identifiers

PMID42680977

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.