ArticlePloS one2012
Accurate prediction of protein structural class.
Article in PloS one, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Using Recursive Feature Selection with Random Forest to Improve Protein Structural Class Prediction for Low-Similarity Sequences.Computational and mathematical methods in medicine · 2021Article
- Prediction of Protein Structural Classes for Low-Similarity Sequences Based on Consensus Sequence and Segmented PSSM.Computational and mathematical methods in medicine · 2015Article
- Article
- Understanding the undelaying mechanism of HA-subtyping in the level of physic-chemical characteristics of protein.PloS one · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Because of the increasing gap between the data from sequencing and structural genomics, the accurate prediction of the structural class of a protein domain solely from the primary sequence has remained a challenging problem in structural biology. Traditional sequence-based predictors generally select several sequence features and then feed them directly into a classification program to identify the structural class. The current best sequence-based predictor achieved an overall accuracy of 74.1% when tested on a widely used, non-homologous benchmark dataset 25PDB. In the present work, we built a multiple linear regression (MLR) model to convert the 440-dimensional (440D) sequence feature vector extracted from the Position Specific Scoring Matrix (PSSM) of a protein domain to a 4-dimensinal (4D) structural feature vector, which could then be used to predict the four major structural classes. We performed 10-fold cross-validation and jackknife tests of the method on a large non-homologous dataset containing 8,244 domains distributed among the four major classes. The performance of our approach outperformed all of the existing sequence-based methods and had an overall accuracy of 83.1%, which is even higher than the results of those predicted secondary structure-based methods.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.