Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26949519›Full record

ReviewF1000Research2015

Computer-aided drug discovery.

Jürgen Bajorath

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in F1000Research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Docking-undocking combination applied to the D3R Grand Challenge 2015.Journal of computer-aided molecular design · 2016
    Article
  14. Review
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.

Jürgen BajorathDepartment of Life Science Informatics, Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität, Dahlmannstr. 2, Bonn, D-53113, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Computational approaches are an integral part of interdisciplinary drug discovery research. Understanding the science behind computational tools, their opportunities, and limitations is essential to make a true impact on drug discovery at different levels. If applied in a scientifically meaningful way, computational methods improve the ability to identify and evaluate potential drug molecules, but there remain weaknesses in the methods that preclude naïve applications. Herein, current trends in computer-aided drug discovery are reviewed, and selected computational areas are discussed. Approaches are highlighted that aid in the identification and optimization of new drug candidates. Emphasis is put on the presentation and discussion of computational concepts and methods, rather than case studies or application examples. As such, this contribution aims to provide an overview of the current methodological spectrum of computational drug discovery for a broad audience.

Indexed as

computationaldrug discoveryin silico

Identifiers

PMID26949519
PMCPMC4756805

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.