4.5 Article

Implementation of Statistical Process Control for Proteomic Experiments Via LC MS/MS

期刊

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s13361-013-0824-5

关键词

Quality control; Statistical process control; Proteomics; Mass spectrometry; Shewhart control charts

资金

  1. National Science Foundation [1109989]
  2. National Institutes of Health [P41 GM103533, R01 GM103551, R01 GM107142]
  3. Direct For Biological Sciences
  4. Division Of Integrative Organismal Systems [1109989] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Statistical process control (SPC) is a robust set of tools that aids in the visualization, detection, and identification of assignable causes of variation in any process that creates products, services, or information. A tool has been developed termed Statistical Process Control in Proteomics (SProCoP) which implements aspects of SPC (e.g., control charts and Pareto analysis) into the Skyline proteomics software. It monitors five quality control metrics in a shotgun or targeted proteomic workflow. None of these metrics require peptide identification. The source code, written in the R statistical language, runs directly from the Skyline interface, which supports the use of raw data files from several of the mass spectrometry vendors. It provides real time evaluation of the chromatographic performance (e.g., retention time reproducibility, peak asymmetry, and resolution), and mass spectrometric performance (targeted peptide ion intensity and mass measurement accuracy for high resolving power instruments) via control charts. Thresholds are experiment- and instrument-specific and are determined empirically from user-defined quality control standards that enable the separation of random noise and systematic error. Finally, Pareto analysis provides a summary of performance metrics and guides the user to metrics with high variance. The utility of these charts to evaluate proteomic experiments is illustrated in two case studies.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据