Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36416859›Full record

ArticleEssays in biochemistry2022

NMR insights into dynamic, multivalent interactions of intrinsically disordered regions: from discrete complexes to condensates.

Rashik Ahmed, Julie D Forman-Kay

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Essays in biochemistry, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. In situ NMR and integrative proteomics reveal the interaction signature of serum α-synuclein.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. AlphaFold-Multimer accurately captures interactions and dynamics of intrinsically disordered protein regions.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Protein Binding: A Fuzzy Concept.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Rashik AhmedProgram in Molecular Medicine, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON M5G 0A4, Canada.
Julie D Forman-KayProgram in Molecular Medicine, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON M5G 0A4, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-8265-972X
Hospital for Sick Children · CAUniversity of Toronto · CA

Funding

CIHR FND-148375CIHR RN444138-458819
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The spatial and temporal organization of interactions between proteins underlie the regulation of most cellular processes. The requirement for such interactions to be specific predisposes a view that protein-protein interactions are relatively static and are formed through the stable complementarity of the interacting partners. A growing body of reports indicate, however, that many interactions lead to fuzzy complexes with an ensemble of conformations in dynamic exchange accounting for the observed binding. Here, we discuss how NMR has facilitated the characterization of these discrete, dynamic complexes and how such characterization has aided the understanding of dynamic, condensed phases of phase-separating proteins with exchanging multivalent interactions.

Indexed as

Biochemical PhenomenaIntrinsically Disordered ProteinsIntrinsically Disordered Proteinsbiomolecular condensatesfuzzy complexesintrinsically disordered proteinsNMR spectroscopyphase separation

Identifiers

PMID36416859
PMCPMC9760423
OpenAlexW4309828339

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.