ReviewCurrent medicinal chemistry2025
Developing Generalizable Scoring Functions for Molecular Docking: Challenges and Perspectives.
Review in Current medicinal chemistry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Protein-Ligand Docking Simulations for Drug Discovery.Current medicinal chemistry · 2025Article
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
Abstract
Structure-based drug discovery methods, such as molecular docking and virtual screening, have become invaluable tools in developing novel drugs. At the core of these methods are Scoring Functions (SFs), which predict the binding affinity between ligands and protein targets. This study aims to review and contextualize the challenges and best practices in training novel scoring functions to improve their accuracy and generalizability in predicting protein-ligand binding affinities. Effective training of scoring functions requires careful attention to the quality of training data and methodologies. We emphasize the need for robust training strategies to produce consistent and generalizable SFs. Key considerations include addressing hidden biases and overfitting in machine-learning models, as well as ensuring the use of high-quality, unbiased datasets for both training and evaluation of SFs. Innovative hybrid methods, combining the advantages of empirical and machine-learning approaches, hold promise for outperforming current scoring functions while displaying greater generalizability and versatility.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39482913What 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.