Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24287782›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Drug discovery2013

Chemical predictive modelling to improve compound quality.

John G Cumming, Andrew M Davis, Sorel Muresan, Markus Haeberlein, Hongming Chen

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Drug discovery, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 87 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
87citing 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

87 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Unraveling bioactive potential and production inChinese herbal medicines · 2025
    Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Network Pharmacology andCurrent pharmaceutical design · 2025
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Structure-activity relationship of pharmacophores and toxicophores: the need for clinical strategy.Daru : journal of Faculty of Pharmacy, Tehran University of Medical Sciences · 2024
    Review
  20. Review

27 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

5 authors.

John G CummingChemistry Innovation Centre, Discovery Sciences, AstraZeneca R&D, Alderley Park, Macclesfield SK10 4TG, UK.
Andrew M Davis
Sorel Muresan
Markus Haeberlein
Hongming Chen

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The 'quality' of small-molecule drug candidates, encompassing aspects including their potency, selectivity and ADMET (absorption, distribution, metabolism, excretion and toxicity) characteristics, is a key factor influencing the chances of success in clinical trials. Importantly, such characteristics are under the control of chemists during the identification and optimization of lead compounds. Here, we discuss the application of computational methods, particularly quantitative structure-activity relationships (QSARs), in guiding the selection of higher-quality drug candidates, as well as cultural factors that may have affected their use and impact.

Indexed as

Models, ChemicalQuantitative Structure-Activity RelationshipAnimalsDrug CompoundingForecastingHumansPharmaceutical PreparationsPharmaceutical Preparations

Identifiers

PMID24287782

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.