Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27829821›Full record

ArticleCrystal growth & design2016

Enhanced NMR Discrimination of Pharmaceutically Relevant Molecular Crystal Forms through Fragment-Based Ab Initio Chemical Shift Predictions.

Joshua D Hartman, Graeme M Day, Gregory J O Beran

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Crystal growth & design, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. A Machine Learning Model of Chemical Shifts for Chemically and Structurally Diverse Molecular Solids.The journal of physical chemistry. C, Nanomaterials and interfaces · 2022
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Solid-state NMR spectroscopy.Nature reviews. Methods primers · 2021
    Article
  10. Interpol review of controlled substances 2016-2019.Forensic science international. Synergy · 2020
    Review
  11. 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

3 authors.

Joshua D HartmanDepartment of Chemistry, University of California , Riverside, California 92521 United States.
Graeme M DaySchool of Chemistry, University of Southampton , Highfield, Southampton SO17 1BJ, United Kingdom.
Gregory J O BeranDepartment of Chemistry, University of California , Riverside, California 92521 United States.

Funding

European Research Council 307358
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Chemical shift prediction plays an important role in the determination or validation of crystal structures with solid-state nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy. One of the fundamental theoretical challenges lies in discriminating variations in chemical shifts resulting from different crystallographic environments. Fragment-based electronic structure methods provide an alternative to the widely used plane wave gauge-including projector augmented wave (GIPAW) density functional technique for chemical shift prediction. Fragment methods allow hybrid density functionals to be employed routinely in chemical shift prediction, and we have recently demonstrated appreciable improvements in the accuracy of the predicted shifts when using the hybrid PBE0 functional instead of generalized gradient approximation (GGA) functionals like PBE. Here, we investigate the solid-state

Identifiers

PMID27829821
PMCPMC5095663

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.