Comparison of Proteomic Assessment Methods in Multiple Cohort Studies.

Raffield LM, Dang H, Pratte KA, Jacobson S, Gillenwater LA, Ampleford E, Barjaktarevic I, Basta P, Clish CB, Comellas AP, Cornell E, Curtis JL, Doerschuk C, Durda P, Emson C, Freeman CM, Guo X, Hastie AT, Hawkins GA, Herrera J, Johnson WC, Labaki WW, Liu Y, Masters B, Miller M, Ortega VE, Papanicolaou G, Peters S, Taylor KD, Rich SS, Rotter JI, Auer P, Reiner AP, Tracy RP, Ngo D, Gerszten RE, O'Neal WK, Bowler RP, NHLBI Trans-Omics for Precision Medicine (TOPMed) Consortium

Open source

DOI: 10.1002/pmic.201900278
Published: 2020 Jun
Container: Proteomics
Publisher: Not recorded
Open access: yes

Credibility signals

limited evidence Score 45/100 under policy 1.0.0. This is a metadata assessment, not a judgment of the paper's conclusions.

Show all credibility signals

cautionDOI registered: No matching Crossref record was present in this response. Source: Crossref; license: CC0 metadata
cautionDOI resolves: No matching Crossref record was present in this response. Source: Crossref; license: CC0 metadata
not scoredDirectory of Open Access Journals: No matching DOAJ record was present in this response. No allow-list match; this is not evidence of low credibility. Source: DOAJ; license: CC0
not scoredMEDLINE indexed: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made. Source: No authority result supplied; license: Unknown
not scoredOpenAlex core source: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made. Source: No authority result supplied; license: Unknown
not scoredKnown publisher allow-list: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made. Source: No authority result supplied; license: Unknown
not scoredROR affiliation: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made. Source: No authority result supplied; license: Unknown
not scoredRetraction Watch retraction: No retraction notice matched this DOI in the deployed snapshot. No matching event found; coverage may be incomplete. Source: Retraction Watch; license: CC BY 4.0
not scoredRetraction Watch expression of concern: No expression of concern notice matched this DOI in the deployed snapshot. No matching event found; coverage may be incomplete. Source: Retraction Watch; license: CC BY 4.0
not scoredRetraction Watch correction: No correction notice matched this DOI in the deployed snapshot. No matching event found; coverage may be incomplete. Source: Retraction Watch; license: CC BY 4.0
not scoredRetraction Watch reinstatement: No reinstatement notice matched this DOI in the deployed snapshot. No matching event found; coverage may be incomplete. Source: Retraction Watch; license: CC BY 4.0
supportingOpen access status: Normalized open-access status: open. Source: Normalized work metadata; license: Caller-provided; provenance license not supplied to scorer
not scoredPublication license: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made. Source: No authority result supplied; license: Unknown
not scoredPublication version: A publication version was supplied but is not scored. Source: Normalized work metadata; license: Caller-provided; provenance license not supplied to scorer
cautionMetadata completeness: 5 of 6 scored descriptive metadata groups are present; missing fields increase uncertainty. Source: Normalized work metadata; license: Caller-provided; provenance license not supplied to scorer

Cite this work

BibTeX

@article{allodium:10.1002/pmic.201900278,
  title = {Comparison of Proteomic Assessment Methods in Multiple Cohort Studies.},
  author = {Raffield LM and Dang H and Pratte KA and Jacobson S and Gillenwater LA and Ampleford E and Barjaktarevic I and Basta P and Clish CB and Comellas AP and Cornell E and Curtis JL and Doerschuk C and Durda P and Emson C and Freeman CM and Guo X and Hastie AT and Hawkins GA and Herrera J and Johnson WC and Labaki WW and Liu Y and Masters B and Miller M and Ortega VE and Papanicolaou G and Peters S and Taylor KD and Rich SS and Rotter JI and Auer P and Reiner AP and Tracy RP and Ngo D and Gerszten RE and O'Neal WK and Bowler RP and NHLBI Trans-Omics for Precision Medicine (TOPMed) Consortium},
  year = {2020},
  journal = {Proteomics},
  doi = {10.1002/pmic.201900278},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1002/pmic.201900278}
}

RIS

TY  - JOUR
TI  - Comparison of Proteomic Assessment Methods in Multiple Cohort Studies.
AU  - Raffield LM
AU  - Dang H
AU  - Pratte KA
AU  - Jacobson S
AU  - Gillenwater LA
AU  - Ampleford E
AU  - Barjaktarevic I
AU  - Basta P
AU  - Clish CB
AU  - Comellas AP
AU  - Cornell E
AU  - Curtis JL
AU  - Doerschuk C
AU  - Durda P
AU  - Emson C
AU  - Freeman CM
AU  - Guo X
AU  - Hastie AT
AU  - Hawkins GA
AU  - Herrera J
AU  - Johnson WC
AU  - Labaki WW
AU  - Liu Y
AU  - Masters B
AU  - Miller M
AU  - Ortega VE
AU  - Papanicolaou G
AU  - Peters S
AU  - Taylor KD
AU  - Rich SS
AU  - Rotter JI
AU  - Auer P
AU  - Reiner AP
AU  - Tracy RP
AU  - Ngo D
AU  - Gerszten RE
AU  - O'Neal WK
AU  - Bowler RP
AU  - NHLBI Trans-Omics for Precision Medicine (TOPMed) Consortium
PY  - 2020
JO  - Proteomics
DO  - 10.1002/pmic.201900278
UR  - https://doi.org/10.1002/pmic.201900278
ER  -

APA

LM, R., H, D., KA, P., S, J., LA, G., E, A., I, B., P, B., CB, C., AP, C., E, C., JL, C., C, D., P, D., C, E., CM, F., X, G., AT, H., GA, H., J, H., WC, J., WW, L., Y, L., B, M., M, M., VE, O., G, P., S, P., KD, T., SS, R., JI, R., P, A., AP, R., RP, T., D, N., RE, G., WK, O., RP, B., & Consortium, N. T. F. P. M. (. (2020). Comparison of Proteomic Assessment Methods in Multiple Cohort Studies.. Proteomics. https://doi.org/10.1002/pmic.201900278

Source records

pubmed · retrieved 2026-09-26T12:21:30.396Z