ArticleComputational and structural biotechnology journal2022
An integrated protein structure fitness scoring approach for identifying native-like model structures.
Article in Computational and structural biotechnology journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Interpretable machine learning classifies β-lactamase subclasses and prioritizes boundary variants for antimicrobial resistance surveillance.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Article
- Computational mapping of resistance-relevant signals in proteins using deep and classical feature spaces.Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence directed computational protein design: lessons from COVID-19 for pandemic-ready vaccines and antibody therapeutics.Journal of pharmacy & pharmaceutical sciences : a publication of the Canadian Society for Pharmaceutical Sciences, Societe canadienne des sciences pharmaceutiques · 2026Review
- Benchmarking protein language models for protein crystallization.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Role of environmental specificity in CASP results.BMC bioinformatics · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The structural information of a protein is pivotal to comprehend its functions, protein-protein and protein-ligand interactions. There is a widening gap between the number of known protein sequences and that of experimentally determined structures. The protein structure prediction has emerged as an efficient alternative to deliver the reliable structural information of proteins. However, it remains a challenge to identify the best model among the many predicted by one or a few structure prediction methods. Here we report ProFitFun-Meta, a neural network based pure single model scoring method for assessing the quality of predicted model structures by an effective combination structural information of various backbone dihedral angle and residue surface accessibility preferences of amino acid residues with other spatial properties of protein structures. The performance of ProFitFun-Meta was validated and benchmarked against current state-of-the-art methods on the extensive datasets, comprising a Test Dataset (n = 26,604), an External Dataset (n = 40,000), and CASP14 Dataset (n = 1200). The comprehensive performance evaluation of ProFitFun-Meta demonstrated its reliability and efficiency in terms of Spearman's (ρ) and Pearson's (r) correlation coefficients, GDT-TS loss (g), and absolute loss (d). An improved performance over the current state-of-the-art methods and leading performers of CASP14 experiment in quality assessment category demonstrated its potential to become an integral component of computational pipelines for protein modeling and design. The minimal dependencies, high computational efficiency, and portability to various Linux and Windows OS provide an additional edge to ProFitFun-Meta for its easy implementation and applications in various regimes of computational protein folding.
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.