Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27196893›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of molecular sciences2016

Recent Progress in Treating Protein-Ligand Interactions with Quantum-Mechanical Methods.

Nusret Duygu Yilmazer, Martin Korth

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of molecular sciences, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Machine learning classification can reduce false positives in structure-based virtual screening.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2020
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Nusret Duygu YilmazerInstitute for Theoretical Chemistry, Ulm University, Albert-Einstein-Allee 11, 89069 Ulm, Germany. duygu.yilmazer@uni-ulm.de.
Martin KorthInstitute for Theoretical Chemistry, Ulm University, Albert-Einstein-Allee 11, 89069 Ulm, Germany. martin.korth@uni-ulm.de.
Universität Ulm · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We review the first successes and failures of a "new wave" of quantum chemistry-based approaches to the treatment of protein/ligand interactions. These approaches share the use of "enhanced", dispersion (D), and/or hydrogen-bond (H) corrected density functional theory (DFT) or semi-empirical quantum mechanical (SQM) methods, in combination with ensemble weighting techniques of some form to capture entropic effects. Benchmark and model system calculations in comparison to high-level theoretical as well as experimental references have shown that both DFT-D (dispersion-corrected density functional theory) and SQM-DH (dispersion and hydrogen bond-corrected semi-empirical quantum mechanical) perform much more accurately than older DFT and SQM approaches and also standard docking methods. In addition, DFT-D might soon become and SQM-DH already is fast enough to compute a large number of binding modes of comparably large protein/ligand complexes, thus allowing for a more accurate assessment of entropic effects.

Indexed as

Molecular Dynamics SimulationQuantum TheoryBinding SitesComputational BiologyHydrogen BondingLigandsProtein BindingProteinsReproducibility of ResultsThermodynamicsLigandsProteinsdensity functional theoryprotein/ligand interactionsquantum chemistrysemi-empirical quantum mechanical methods

Identifiers

PMID27196893
PMCPMC4881564
OpenAlexW2403926370

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.