Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31803399›Full record

ReviewMedChemComm2019

Molecular evolution of peptides by yeast surface display technology.

Sara Linciano, Stefano Pluda, Arianna Bacchin, Alessandro Angelini

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in MedChemComm, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing 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

24 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Development of Recombinant Antibody by Yeast Surface Display Technology.Current research in pharmacology and drug discovery · 2024
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Incorporating, Quantifying, and Leveraging Noncanonical Amino Acids in Yeast.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2022
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

4 authors.

Sara LincianoDepartment of Molecular Sciences and Nanosystems , Ca' Foscari University of Venice , Via Torino 155 , Venezia Mestre 30172 , Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-4192-4421
Stefano PludaDepartment of Molecular Sciences and Nanosystems , Ca' Foscari University of Venice , Via Torino 155 , Venezia Mestre 30172 , Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-9813-4901
Arianna BacchinDepartment of Molecular Sciences and Nanosystems , Ca' Foscari University of Venice , Via Torino 155 , Venezia Mestre 30172 , Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-3486-2528
Alessandro AngeliniDepartment of Molecular Sciences and Nanosystems , Ca' Foscari University of Venice , Via Torino 155 , Venezia Mestre 30172 , Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-5923-3843

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genetically encoded peptides possess unique properties, such as a small molecular weight and ease of synthesis and modification, that make them suitable to a large variety of applications. However, despite these favorable qualities, naturally occurring peptides are often limited by intrinsic weak binding affinities, poor selectivity and low stability that ultimately restrain their final use. To overcome these limitations, a large variety of

Identifiers

PMID31803399
PMCPMC6836575

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.