ArticleJournal of molecular modeling2024
Exploring blood-brain barrier passage using atomic weighted vector and machine learning.
Article in Journal of molecular modeling, 2024. 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.
- Exploring anti-dengue activity with atomic-weighted vectors, class balancing and machine learning.Molecular diversity · 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
contextThis study investigates the potential of leveraging molecular properties, as determined by MD-LOVIs software and machine learning techniques, to predict the ability of compounds to cross the blood-brain barrier (BBB). Accurate prediction of BBB permeation is critical for the development of central nervous system (CNS) drugs. The study applies various machine learning models, including both classification and regression techniques, to predict BBB passage and molecular activity. Notably, classification models such as GBM-AWV (accuracy = 0.801), GLM-CN (accuracy = 0.808), SVMPoly-means (accuracy = 0.980), SVMPoly-AC (accuracy = 0.980), SVMPoly-MI_TI_SI (accuracy = 0.900), SVMPoly-GI (accuracy = 0.900), RF-means (accuracy = 0.870), and GLM-means (accuracy = 0.818) demonstrate high accuracy in predicting BBB passage. In contrast, regression models like ES-RLM-AG (R
methodsThe computational methods employed in this study include the MD-LOVIs software for generating molecular descriptors and several machine learning algorithms, including gradient boosting machines (GBM), generalized linear models (GLM), support vector machines (SVM) with polynomial kernels, random forests (RF), ensemble regression models, and instance-based learning algorithms. These models were trained and validated using various datasets to predict BBB passage and molecular activity, with the performance metrics reported for each model. Standard computational techniques were employed throughout, ensuring the reliability of the predictions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39485560What 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.