Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23986568›Full record

ArticleBioinformatics (Oxford, England)2013

lDDT: a local superposition-free score for comparing protein structures and models using distance difference tests.

Valerio Mariani, Marco Biasini, Alessandro Barbato, Torsten Schwede

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Bioinformatics (Oxford, England), 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 675 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
675citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

675 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

615 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

4 authors.

Valerio MarianiBiozentrum, Universität Basel, Klingelbergstrasse 50-70 and Computational Structural Biology, SIB Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics, 4056 Basel, Switzerland.
Marco Biasini
Alessandro Barbato
Torsten Schwede

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

motivationThe assessment of protein structure prediction techniques requires objective criteria to measure the similarity between a computational model and the experimentally determined reference structure. Conventional similarity measures based on a global superposition of carbon α atoms are strongly influenced by domain motions and do not assess the accuracy of local atomic details in the model.

resultsThe Local Distance Difference Test (lDDT) is a superposition-free score that evaluates local distance differences of all atoms in a model, including validation of stereochemical plausibility. The reference can be a single structure, or an ensemble of equivalent structures. We demonstrate that lDDT is well suited to assess local model quality, even in the presence of domain movements, while maintaining good correlation with global measures. These properties make lDDT a robust tool for the automated assessment of structure prediction servers without manual intervention. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: Source code, binaries for Linux and MacOSX, and an interactive web server are available at http://swissmodel.expasy.org/lddt. CONTACT: torsten.schwede@unibas.ch. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

Indexed as

Models, MolecularProtein ConformationComputational BiologyProtein FoldingProteinsProtein Structure, TertiarySoftwareStereoisomerismProteins

Identifiers

PMID23986568
PMCPMC3799472

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.