RESUMO
Non-targeted analysis (NTA) using high-resolution mass spectrometry has enabled the detection and identification of unknown and unexpected compounds of interest in a wide range of sample matrices. Despite these benefits of NTA methods, standardized procedures do not yet exist for assessing performance, limiting stakeholders' abilities to suitably interpret and utilize NTA results. Herein, we first summarize existing performance assessment metrics for targeted analyses to provide context and clarify terminology that may be shared between targeted and NTA methods (e.g., terms such as accuracy, precision, sensitivity, and selectivity). We then discuss promising approaches for assessing NTA method performance, listing strengths and key caveats for each approach, and highlighting areas in need of further development. To structure the discussion, we define three types of NTA study objectives: sample classification, chemical identification, and chemical quantitation. Qualitative study performance (i.e., focusing on sample classification and/or chemical identification) can be assessed using the traditional confusion matrix, with some challenges and limitations. Quantitative study performance can be assessed using estimation procedures developed for targeted methods with consideration for additional sources of uncontrolled experimental error. This article is intended to stimulate discussion and further efforts to develop and improve procedures for assessing NTA method performance. Ultimately, improved performance assessments will enable accurate communication and effective utilization of NTA results by stakeholders.