ArticlePeptide science (Hoboken, N.J.)2019
Equipotent enantiomers of cyclic opioid peptides at μ opioid receptor.
Article in Peptide science (Hoboken, N.J.), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Investigating the Landscape of C6-Azaindole Side Chain on the Epoxymorphinan Skeleton via the Nitrogen Walk Concept: A Strategy to Enhance Drug-Like Properties.Journal of medicinal chemistry · 2026Article
- Total synthesis and biological activity of "carbamorphine": O-to-CHProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Article
- Cyclizing Painkillers: Development of Backbone-Cyclic TAPS Analogs.Frontiers in chemistry · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Head-to-tail cyclized analogues of the μ opioid receptor (MOR) agonist tetrapeptides DALDA (H-Tyr-D-Arg-Phe-Lys-NH
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.