Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28211071›Full record

ArticleJournal of computational chemistry2017

Accurate, robust, and reliable calculations of Poisson-Boltzmann binding energies.

Duc D Nguyen, Bao Wang, Guo-Wei Wei

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of computational chemistry, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. MLIMC: Machine Learning-Based Implicit-Solvent Monte Carlo.Chinese journal of chemical physics · 2021
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. The de Rham-Hodge Analysis and Modeling of Biomolecules.Bulletin of mathematical biology · 2020
    Article
  10. An efficient second-order poisson-boltzmann method.Journal of computational chemistry · 2019
    Article
  11. Article
  12. 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.

Duc D NguyenDepartment of Mathematics, Michigan State University, Michigan, 48824.
Bao WangDepartment of Mathematics, Michigan State University, Michigan, 48824.
Guo-Wei WeiDepartment of Mathematics, Michigan State University, Michigan, 48824.ORCID 0000-0002-5781-2937

Funding

Collaborative research: Geometric flow approach to implicit solvation modelingR01GM090208 · NIGMS · MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY · PI WEI, GUOWEI · 2009 to 2014
$1.3M
NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM090208
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Poisson-Boltzmann (PB) model is one of the most popular implicit solvent models in biophysical modeling and computation. The ability of providing accurate and reliable PB estimation of electrostatic solvation free energy, ΔGel, and binding free energy, ΔΔGel, is important to computational biophysics and biochemistry. In this work, we investigate the grid dependence of our PB solver (MIBPB) with solvent excluded surfaces for estimating both electrostatic solvation free energies and electrostatic binding free energies. It is found that the relative absolute error of ΔGel obtained at the grid spacing of 1.0 Å compared to ΔGel at 0.2 Å averaged over 153 molecules is less than 0.2%. Our results indicate that the use of grid spacing 0.6 Å ensures accuracy and reliability in ΔΔGel calculation. In fact, the grid spacing of 1.1 Å appears to deliver adequate accuracy for high throughput screening. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Indexed as

Computers, MolecularModels, MolecularReproducibility of ResultsSolventsStatic ElectricitySurface PropertiesThermodynamicsSolventsaccurate coarse grid Poisson-Boltzmann solverelectrostatic binding free energyreaction field energy

Identifiers

PMID28211071
PMCPMC5844473

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.