Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29242609›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Drug discovery2018

Automating drug discovery.

Gisbert Schneider

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Drug discovery, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 268 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
268citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

268 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Target discovery and drug design in the era of artificial intelligence.Medicinal chemistry research : an international journal for rapid communications on design and mechanisms of action of biologically active agents · 2026
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Artificial intelligence-assisted lead optimization in drug discovery: bridging computational advances and translational challenges.Medicinal chemistry research : an international journal for rapid communications on design and mechanisms of action of biologically active agents · 2026
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Machine Learning for RNA-Targeting Drug Design.Journal of chemical information and modeling · 2026
    Review

208 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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.

Gisbert SchneiderSwiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH), Department of Chemistry and Applied Biosciences, Vladimir-Prelog-Weg 4, 8093 Zürich, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Small-molecule drug discovery can be viewed as a challenging multidimensional problem in which various characteristics of compounds - including efficacy, pharmacokinetics and safety - need to be optimized in parallel to provide drug candidates. Recent advances in areas such as microfluidics-assisted chemical synthesis and biological testing, as well as artificial intelligence systems that improve a design hypothesis through feedback analysis, are now providing a basis for the introduction of greater automation into aspects of this process. This could potentially accelerate time frames for compound discovery and optimization and enable more effective searches of chemical space. However, such approaches also raise considerable conceptual, technical and organizational challenges, as well as scepticism about the current hype around them. This article aims to identify the approaches and technologies that could be implemented robustly by medicinal chemists in the near future and to critically analyse the opportunities and challenges for their more widespread application.

Indexed as

AnimalsDrug DiscoveryDrug IndustryHumansPharmaceutical PreparationsPharmaceutical Preparations

Identifiers

PMID29242609

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.