Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35503203›Full record

ArticleActa crystallographica. Section D, Structural biology2022

Validation analysis of EMDB entries.

Zhe Wang, Ardan Patwardhan, Gerard J Kleywegt

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Acta crystallographica. Section D, Structural biology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Validation of helical symmetry parameters in the EMDB.Acta crystallographica. Section D, Structural biology · 2025
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. EMDB-the Electron Microscopy Data Bank.Nucleic acids research · 2024
    Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Zhe WangEuropean Molecular Biology Laboratory, European Bioinformatics Institute (EMBL-EBI), Wellcome Genome Campus, Hinxton CB10 1SD, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-1119-1765
Ardan PatwardhanEuropean Molecular Biology Laboratory, European Bioinformatics Institute (EMBL-EBI), Wellcome Genome Campus, Hinxton CB10 1SD, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-7663-9028
Gerard J KleywegtEuropean Molecular Biology Laboratory, European Bioinformatics Institute (EMBL-EBI), Wellcome Genome Campus, Hinxton CB10 1SD, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-4670-0331
European Bioinformatics Institute · GB

Funding

Wellcome Trust 208398/Z/17/ZWellcome Trust 212977/Z/18/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Electron Microscopy Data Bank (EMDB) is the central archive of the electron cryo-microscopy (cryo-EM) community for storing and disseminating volume maps and tomograms. With input from the community, EMDB has developed new resources for the validation of cryo-EM structures, focusing on the quality of the volume data alone and that of the fit of any models, themselves archived in the Protein Data Bank (PDB), to the volume data. Based on recommendations from community experts, the validation resources are developed in a three-tiered system. Tier 1 covers an extensive and evolving set of validation metrics, including tried and tested metrics as well as more experimental ones, which are calculated for all EMDB entries and presented in the Validation Analysis (VA) web resource. This system is particularly useful for cryo-EM experts, both to validate individual structures and to assess the utility of new validation metrics. Tier 2 comprises a subset of the validation metrics covered by the VA resource that have been subjected to extensive testing and are considered to be useful for specialists as well as nonspecialists. These metrics are presented on the entry-specific web pages for the entire archive on the EMDB website. As more experience is gained with the metrics included in the VA resource, it is expected that consensus will emerge in the community regarding a subset that is suitable for inclusion in the tier 2 system. Tier 3, finally, consists of the validation reports and servers that are produced by the Worldwide Protein Data Bank (wwPDB) Consortium. Successful metrics from tier 2 will be proposed for inclusion in the wwPDB validation pipeline and reports. The details of the new resource are described, with an emphasis on the tier 1 system. The output of all three tiers is publicly available, either through the EMDB website (tiers 1 and 2) or through the wwPDB ftp sites (tier 3), although the content of all three will evolve over time (fastest for tier 1 and slowest for tier 3). It is our hope that these validation resources will help the cryo-EM community to obtain a better understanding of the quality and of the best ways to assess the quality of cryo-EM structures in EMDB and PDB.

Indexed as

Databases, ProteinCryoelectron MicroscopyMicroscopy, ElectronProtein Conformationarchivingcryo-EMElectron Microscopy Data BankProtein Data Bankvalidation

Identifiers

PMID35503203
PMCPMC9063848
OpenAlexW4225406583

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.