Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35229861›Full record

ReviewChemical communications (Cambridge, England)2022

Unlocking the computational design of metal-organic cages.

Andrew Tarzia, Kim E Jelfs

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Chemical communications (Cambridge, England), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing 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

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Unbiased Structure Prediction of Sophisticated Cage Structures.Angewandte Chemie (International ed. in English) · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Journal of chemical theory and computation · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Catalysis by [GaChemistry (Weinheim an der Bergstrasse, Germany) · 2022
    Article
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

2 authors.

Andrew TarziaDepartment of Chemistry, Molecular Sciences Research Hub, Imperial College London, White City Campus, Wood Lane, London, W12 0BZ, UK. k.jelfs@imperial.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8797-8666
Kim E JelfsDepartment of Chemistry, Molecular Sciences Research Hub, Imperial College London, White City Campus, Wood Lane, London, W12 0BZ, UK. k.jelfs@imperial.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7683-7630

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Metal-organic cages are macrocyclic structures that can possess an intrinsic void that can hold molecules for encapsulation, adsorption, sensing, and catalysis applications. As metal-organic cages may be comprised from nearly any combination of organic and metal-containing components, cages can form with diverse shapes and sizes, allowing for tuning toward targeted properties. Therefore, their near-infinite design space is almost impossible to explore through experimentation alone and computational design can play a crucial role in exploring new systems. Although high-throughput computational design and screening workflows have long been known as powerful tools in drug and materials discovery, their application in exploring metal-organic cages is more recent. We show examples of structure prediction and host-guest/catalytic property evaluation of metal-organic cages. These examples are facilitated by advances in methods that handle metal-containing systems with improved accuracy and are the beginning of the development of automated cage design workflows. We finally outline a scope for how high-throughput computational methods can assist and drive experimental decisions as the field pushes toward functional and complex metal-organic cages. In particular, we highlight the importance of considering realistic, flexible systems.

Indexed as

MetalsAdsorptionCatalysisMetals

Identifiers

PMID35229861
PMCPMC8932387

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.