ArticleJournal of computer-aided molecular design2024
Comparative assessment of physics-based in silico methods to calculate relative solubilities.
Article in Journal of computer-aided molecular design, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Data-Driven Critical Evaluation of the General Solubility Equation.Journal of chemical information and modeling · 2026Article
- Understanding How Synthetic Impurities Affect Glyphosate Solubility and Crystal Growth Using Free Energy Calculations and Molecular Dynamics Simulations.The journal of physical chemistry. B · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Relative solubilities, i.e. whether a given molecule is more soluble in one solvent compared to others, is a critical parameter for pharmaceutical and agricultural formulation development and chemical synthesis, material science, and environmental chemistry. In silico predictions of this crucial variable can help reducing experiments, waste of solvents and synthesis optimization. In this study, we evaluate the performance of different physics-based methods for predicting relative solubilities. Our assessment involves quantum mechanics-based COSMO-RS and molecular dynamics-based free energy methods using OPLS4, the open-source OpenFF Sage, and GAFF force fields, spanning over 200 solvent-solute combinations. Our investigation highlights the important role of compound multimerization, an effect which must be accounted for to obtain accurate relative solubility predictions. The performance landscape of these methods is varied, with significant differences in precision depending on both the method used and the solute considered, thereby offering an improved understanding of the predictive power of physics-based methods in chemical research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39470860What 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.