Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31984178›Full record

ReviewBiophysics and physicobiology2019

Gō model revisited.

Shoji Takada

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Biophysics and physicobiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing 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

31 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Computational Ligand-Binding Site Prediction.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2026
    Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Journal of chemical theory and computation · 2024
    Article
  16. Multi-Journal of chemical theory and computation · 2024
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Mutation-Specific Differences in Kv7.1 (International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    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

1 author.

Shoji TakadaDepartment of Biophysics, Graduate School of Science, Kyoto University, Kyoto 606-8502, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This review discusses Gō models broadly used in biomolecular simulations. I start with a brief description of the original lattice model study by Nobuhiro Gō. Then, the theory of protein folding behind Gō model, free energy approaches, and off-lattice Gō models are reviewed. I also mention a stringent test for the assumption in Gō models given from all-atom molecular dynamics simulations. Subsequently, I move to application of Gō models to protein dynamical functions. Various extension of Gō models is also reviewed. Finally, some publicly available tools to use Gō models are listed.

Indexed as

coarse-grained simulationfunnel energy landscapeGō modelprotein foldingstructure-based model

Identifiers

PMID31984178
PMCPMC6976017

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.