Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38505413›Full record

ReviewBiophysics reviews2022

Machine learning approaches for biomolecular, biophysical, and biomaterials research.

Carolin A Rickert, Oliver Lieleg

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Biophysics reviews, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Future Frontiers in Bioinspired Implanted Biomaterials.Advanced materials (Deerfield Beach, Fla.) · 2025
    Review
  3. 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

2 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A fluent conversation with a virtual assistant, person-tailored news feeds, and deep-fake images created within seconds-all those things that have been unthinkable for a long time are now a part of our everyday lives. What these examples have in common is that they are realized by different means of machine learning (ML), a technology that has fundamentally changed many aspects of the modern world. The possibility to process enormous amount of data in multi-hierarchical, digital constructs has paved the way not only for creating intelligent systems but also for obtaining surprising new insight into many scientific problems. However, in the different areas of biosciences, which typically rely heavily on the collection of time-consuming experimental data, applying ML methods is a bit more challenging: Here, difficulties can arise from small datasets and the inherent, broad variability, and complexity associated with studying biological objects and phenomena. In this Review, we give an overview of commonly used ML algorithms (which are often referred to as "machines") and learning strategies as well as their applications in different bio-disciplines such as molecular biology, drug development, biophysics, and biomaterials science. We highlight how selected research questions from those fields were successfully translated into machine readable formats, discuss typical problems that can arise in this context, and provide an overview of how to resolve those encountered difficulties.

Identifiers

PMID38505413
PMCPMC10914139

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.