Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39312158›Full record

ReviewMethods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.)2025

QSAR: Using the Past to Study the Present.

Giuseppina C Gini

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

1 author.

Giuseppina C GiniDEIB, Politecnico di Milano, Milan, Italy. giuseppina.gini@polimi.it.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Quantitative structure-activity relationships (QSAR) is a method for predicting the physical and biological properties of small molecules; it is in use in industry and public services. However, as any scientific method, it is challenged by more and more requests, especially considering its possible role in assessing the safety of new chemicals. To answer the question whether QSAR, by exploiting available knowledge, can build new knowledge, the chapter reviews QSAR methods in search of a QSAR epistemology. QSAR stands on tree pillars, i.e., biological data, chemical knowledge, and modeling algorithms. Usually the biological data, resulting from good experimental practice, are taken as a true picture of the world; chemical knowledge has scientific bases; so if a QSAR model is not working, blame modeling. The role of modeling in developing scientific theories, and in producing knowledge, is so analyzed. QSAR is a mature technology and is part of a large body of in silico methods and other computational methods. The active debate about the acceptability of the QSAR models, about the way to communicate them, and the explanation to provide accompanies the development of today QSAR models. An example about predicting possible endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDC) shows the many faces of modern QSAR methods.

Indexed as

Quantitative Structure-Activity RelationshipAlgorithmsEndocrine DisruptorsHumansEndocrine DisruptorsEndocrine disruptors chemicals (EDCs)ExplanationInductionMachine learning (ML) and Deep learning (DL)Predictive models(Quantitative) structure-activity relationships ((Q)SAR)Structural alert (SA)ToxicologyValidation

Identifiers

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.