ReviewIUCrJ2019
Why is interoperability between the two fields of chemical crystallography and protein crystallography so difficult?
Review in IUCrJ, 2019. 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, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Crystal structure via fluctuation scattering.IUCrJ · 2024Article
- Article
- Review
- Pre- and Post-publication Verification for Reproducible Data Mining in Macromolecular Crystallography.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2022Article
- Solvates of New Arylpiperazine Salicylamide Derivative-a Multi-Technique Approach to the Description of 5 HTR Ligand Structure and Interactions.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Article
- Crystal engineering in all its hues inIUCrJ · 2020Article
- A shared vision for macromolecular crystallography over the next five years.Structural dynamics (Melville, N.Y.) · 2019Article
- FACT and FAIR with Big Data allows objectivity in science: The view of crystallography.Structural dynamics (Melville, N.Y.) · 2019Article
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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The interoperability of chemical and biological crystallographic data is a key challenge to research and its application to pharmaceutical design. Research attempting to combine data from the two disciplines, small-molecule or chemical crystallography (CX) and macromolecular crystallography (MX), will face unique challenges including variations in terminology, software development, file format and databases which differ significantly from CX to MX. This perspective overview spans the two disciplines and originated from the investigation of protein binding to model radiopharmaceuticals. The opportunities of interlinked research while utilizing the two databases of the CSD (Cambridge Structural Database) and the PDB (Protein Data Bank) will be highlighted. The advantages of software that can handle multiple file formats and the circuitous route to convert organometallic small-molecule structural data for use in protein refinement software will be discussed. In addition some pointers to avoid being shipwrecked will be shared, such as the care which must be taken when interpreting data precision involving small molecules versus proteins.
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.