ReviewPhysical biology2017
Quantitative computational models of molecular self-assembly in systems biology.
Review in Physical biology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Modeling reveals the strength of weak interactions in stacked-ring assembly.Biophysical journal · 2024Article
- Application of molecular dynamics simulation in self-assembled cancer nanomedicine.Biomaterials research · 2023Review
- Collagen fibril assembly: New approaches to unanswered questions.Matrix biology plus · 2021Article
- Atomistic molecular dynamics simulations of tubulin heterodimers explain the motion of a microtubule.European biophysics journal : EBJ · 2021Article
- Speed limits of protein assembly with reversible membrane localization.The Journal of chemical physics · 2021Article
- "Essentially, all models are wrong, but some are useful"-a cross-disciplinary agenda for building useful models in cell biology and biophysics.Biophysical reviews · 2018Review
- A method for efficient Bayesian optimization of self-assembly systems from scattering data.BMC systems biology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Molecular self-assembly is the dominant form of chemical reaction in living systems, yet efforts at systems biology modeling are only beginning to appreciate the need for and challenges to accurate quantitative modeling of self-assembly. Self-assembly reactions are essential to nearly every important process in cell and molecular biology and handling them is thus a necessary step in building comprehensive models of complex cellular systems. They present exceptional challenges, however, to standard methods for simulating complex systems. While the general systems biology world is just beginning to deal with these challenges, there is an extensive literature dealing with them for more specialized self-assembly modeling. This review will examine the challenges of self-assembly modeling, nascent efforts to deal with these challenges in the systems modeling community, and some of the solutions offered in prior work on self-assembly specifically. The review concludes with some consideration of the likely role of self-assembly in the future of complex biological system models more generally.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.