Correction to: A new semi-automated workflow for chemical data retrieval and quality checking for modeling applications.

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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Ensemble learning-guided discovery of anti-tuberculosis phytochemicals: computational prediction and mechanistic insights.Journal of computer-aided molecular design · 2026
   Article
2. TCMSID: a simplified integrated database for drug discovery from traditional chinese medicine.Journal of cheminformatics · 2022
   Article

Corrections and comments

• Erratum for
  A new semi-automated workflow for chemical data retrieval and quality checking for modeling applications.2018

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract