ArticleCrystal growth & design2022
Comparing and Quantifying the Efficiency of Cocrystal Screening Methods for Praziquantel.
Article in Crystal growth & design, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Deep Supramolecular Language Processing for Co-Crystal Prediction.Angewandte Chemie (International ed. in English) · 2025Article
- Solubilization techniques used for poorly water-soluble drugs.Acta pharmaceutica Sinica. B · 2024Review
- Cocrystal screening of benznidazole based on electronic transition, molecular reactivity, hydrogen bonding, and stability.Journal of molecular modeling · 2024Article
- Screening, Synthesis, and Characterization of a More Rapidly Dissolving Celecoxib Crystal Form.ACS omega · 2024Article
- Structural Landscape of α-Acetamidocinnamic Acid Cocrystals with Bipyridine-Based Coformers: Influence of Crystal Packing on Their Thermal and Photophysical Properties.Crystal growth & design · 2024Article
- Praziquantel Fifty Years on: A Comprehensive Overview of Its Solid State.Pharmaceutics · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pharmaceutical cocrystals are highly interesting due to their effect on physicochemical properties and their role in separation technologies, particularly for chiral molecules. Detection of new cocrystals is a challenge, and robust screening methods are required. As numerous techniques exist that differ in their crystallization mechanisms, their efficiencies depend on the coformers investigated. The most important parameters characterizing the methods are the (a) screenable coformer fraction, (b) coformer success rate, (c) ability to give several cocrystals per successful coformer, (d) identification of new stable phases, and (e) experimental convenience. Based on these parameters, we compare and quantify the performance of three methods: liquid-assisted grinding, solvent evaporation, and saturation temperature measurements of mixtures. These methods were used to screen 30 molecules, predicted by a network-based link prediction algorithm (described in Cryst. Growth Des.
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.