ArticleMethods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.)2025
Computational Prediction of Linear Interacting Peptides.
Article 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. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Intrinsically disordered protein regions, IDRs, are observed in many eukaryotic proteins. They play critical roles in essentially all cellular processes because segments of these regions, known as linear interacting peptides (LIPs), are heavily involved in regulatory protein interactions across proteomes. This chapter presents an integrated summary of the results from the last two Critical Assessments of protein Intrinsic Disorder predictions, known as CAID events, on the computational prediction of LIP segments. Because the CAID community questioned the quality of the test dataset used by the first CAID event, we reannotated this dataset using more accurate annotations from the latest DisProt database release. Then, we compared the results of the first CAID with the updated data and the results of the second CAID event. Our comparison highlights the importance of data annotation on the evaluation outcome and provides recommendations for users of LIP predictors.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39576585What 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.