Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39140856›Full record

SynthesisBriefings in bioinformatics2024

Quantum computing in bioinformatics: a systematic review mapping.

Katarzyna Nałęcz-Charkiewicz, Kamil Charkiewicz, Robert M Nowak

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Briefings in bioinformatics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Quantum computing applications in drug discovery.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2026
    Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Quantum neural networks meet federated learning for DNA mutation prediction.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2025
    Article
  15. 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.

Katarzyna Nałęcz-CharkiewiczArtificial Intelligence Division, Institute of Computer Science, Faculty of Electronics and Information Technology, Warsaw University of Technology, Nowowiejska 15/19, 00-665 Warsaw, Poland.
Kamil CharkiewiczIndependent Researcher, Warsaw, Poland.
Robert M NowakArtificial Intelligence Division, Institute of Computer Science, Faculty of Electronics and Information Technology, Warsaw University of Technology, Nowowiejska 15/19, 00-665 Warsaw, Poland.

Funding

Warsaw University of Technology BPIDUB.11.3.2022
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The field of quantum computing (QC) is expanding, with efforts being made to apply it to areas previously covered by classical algorithms and methods. Bioinformatics is one such domain that is developing in terms of QC. This article offers a broad mapping review of methods and algorithms of QC in bioinformatics, marking the first of its kind. It presents an overview of the domain and aids researchers in identifying further research directions in the early stages of this field of knowledge. The work presented here shows the current state-of-the-art solutions, focuses on general future directions, and highlights the limitations of current methods. The gathered data includes a comprehensive list of identified methods along with descriptions, classifications, and elaborations of their advantages and disadvantages. Results are presented not just in a descriptive table but also in an aggregated and visual format.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsComputational BiologyQuantum TheoryHumansbioinformaticsmapping reviewquantum computing

Identifiers

PMID39140856
PMCPMC11323091

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.