Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30613211›Full record

ArticleWiley interdisciplinary reviews. Computational molecular science

Computational protein structure refinement: Almost there, yet still so far to go.

Michael Feig

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Computational molecular science. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing 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

41 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. "Dividing and Conquering" and "Caching" in Molecular Modeling.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

1 author.

Michael FeigDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Michigan State University, 603 Wilson Rd., Room 218 BCH, East Lansing, MI, USA, feig@msu.edu; 517-432-7439.

Funding

Protein structure refinement through effective sampling and scoringR01GM084953 · NIGMS · MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY · PI FEIG, MICHAEL · 2008 to 2017
$2.5M
NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM084953
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Protein structures are essential in modern biology yet experimental methods are far from being able to catch up with the rapid increase in available genomic data. Computational protein structure prediction methods aim to fill the gap while the role of protein structure refinement is to take approximate initial template-based models and bring them closer to the true native structure. Current methods for computational structure refinement rely on molecular dynamics simulations, related sampling methods, or iterative structure optimization protocols. The best methods are able to achieve moderate degrees of refinement but consistent refinement that can reach near-experimental accuracy remains elusive. Key issues revolve around the accuracy of the energy function, the inability to reliably rank multiple models, and the use of restraints that keep sampling close to the native state but also limit the degree of possible refinement. A different aspect is the question of what exactly the target of high-resolution refinement should be as experimental structures are affected by experimental conditions and different biological questions require varying levels of accuracy. While improvement of the global protein structure is a difficult problem, high-resolution refinement methods that improves local structural quality such as favorable stereochemistry and the avoidance of atomic clashes are much more successful.

Identifiers

PMID30613211
PMCPMC6319934

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.