ArticleRSC advances2020
Article in RSC advances, 2020. 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.
- Application of the Transition State Theory in the Study of the Osmotic Permeabilities of AQP7, AQP10 and GlpF.Membranes · 2025Article
- Extending the PARCH Scale: Assessing Hydropathy of Proteins across Multiple Water Models.Journal of chemical information and modeling · 2025Article
- Article
- Potential toxicity of Graphene (Oxide) quantum dots to human intestinal fatty acid binding protein (HIFABP) via obstructing the protein's openings.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Label-Free Digital Holotomography Reveals Ibuprofen-Induced Morphological Changes to Red Blood Cells.ACS nanoscience Au · 2023Article
- Methods for studying mammalian aquaporin biology.Biology methods & protocols · 2023Review
- Quantitative study of unsaturated transport of glycerol through aquaglyceroporin that has high affinity for glycerol.RSC advances · 2020Article
- Highlighting membrane protein structure and function: A celebration of the Protein Data Bank.The Journal of biological chemistryReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Modelling water and membrane lipids is an essential element in the computational research of biophysical/biochemical processes such as water transport across the cell membrane. In this study, we examined the accuracies of two popular water models, TIP3P and TIP4P, in the molecular dynamics simulations of erythrocyte aquaporins (AQP1 and AQP3). We modelled the erythrocyte membrane as an asymmetric lipid bilayer with appropriate lipid compositions of its inner and outer leaflet, in comparison with a symmetric lipid bilayer of a single lipid type. We computed the AQP1/3 permeabilities with the transition state theory with full correction for recrossing events. We also conducted cell swelling assays for water transport across the erythrocyte membrane. The experimental results agree with the TIP3P water-erythrocyte membrane model, in confirmation of the expected accuracy of the erythrocyte membrane model, the TIP3P water model, and the CHARMM parameters for water-protein interactions.
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.