MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2053089337 · doi:10.1017/s1462399410001614

Mass spectrometry-based proteomics in biomedical research: emerging technologies and future strategies

2010· review· en· W2053089337 on OpenAlexafffund
Geraldine M. Walsh, Jason C. Rogalski, Cordula Klockenbusch, Juergen Kast

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Reviews in Molecular Medicine · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAdvanced Proteomics Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCanadian Institute for Theoretical Astrophysics
KeywordsProteomicsData scienceComputer scienceComputational biologyMass spectrometryChemistryBiologyChromatography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, the technology and methods widely available for mass spectrometry (MS)-based proteomics have increased in power and potential, allowing the study of protein-level processes occurring in biological systems. Although these methods remain an active area of research, established techniques are already helping answer biological questions. Here, this recent evolution of MS-based proteomics and its applications are reviewed, including standard methods for protein and peptide separation, biochemical fractionation, quantitation, targeted MS approaches such as selected reaction monitoring, data analysis and bioinformatics. Recent research in many of these areas reveals that proteomics has moved beyond simply cataloguing proteins in biological systems and is finally living up to its initial potential - as an essential tool to aid related disciplines, notably health research. From here, there is great potential for MS-based proteomics to move beyond basic research, into clinical research and diagnostics.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.967
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.059
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.369 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations31
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Reviews in Molecular MedicineSame topicAdvanced Proteomics Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207