Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23850893›Full record

ReviewFEBS letters2013

A century of enzyme kinetic analysis, 1913 to 2013.

Kenneth A Johnson

Abstract readHistorical ArticleReview
In one paragraph

Review in FEBS letters, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 57 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
57citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

57 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Semiartificial COChemical reviews · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Multi-scale models of whole cells: progress and challenges.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2023
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Kenneth A JohnsonInstitute for Cell and Molecular Biology, Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of Texas at Austin, 2500 Speedway, MBB 3.122, Austin, TX 78735, USA. kajohnson@mail.utexas.edu

Funding

Mechanism of mitochondrial DNA replicationR01GM044613 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AUSTIN · PI JOHNSON, KENNETH ALLEN · 1991 to 2011
$4.3M
Nucleotide selectivity and drug resistance by HIV reverse transcriptaseR01GM084741 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN · PI JOHNSON, KENNETH ALLEN · 2009 to 2012
$1.2M
NIGMS NIH HHS GM044613NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM044613NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM084741
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This review traces the history and logical progression of methods for quantitative analysis of enzyme kinetics from the 1913 Michaelis and Menten paper to the application of modern computational methods today. Following a brief review of methods for fitting steady state kinetic data, modern methods are highlighted for fitting full progress curve kinetics based upon numerical integration of rate equations, including a re-analysis of the original Michaelis-Menten full time course kinetic data. Finally, several illustrations of modern transient state kinetic methods of analysis are shown which enable the elucidation of reactions occurring at the active sites of enzymes in order to relate structure and function.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsComputer SimulationData Interpretation, StatisticalEnzymesHistory, 20th CenturyHistory, 21st CenturyKineticsModels, ChemicalProtein ConformationEnzymes5-enoylpyruvoylshikimate-3-phosphate7-diethylamino-3-[([(2-maleimidyl)ethyl]amino)carbonyl]coumarinComputer simulationEnzyme kineticsEPSPGlobal data fittingHIV reverse transciptaseHIVRTMDCCMichaelis–MentenS3Pshikimate 3-phosphate

Identifiers

PMID23850893
PMCPMC4624389

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.