ReviewNature communications2025
Where and how to house big data on small fragments.
Review in Nature communications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- A resource-efficient structure-based workflow for fragment progression enables parallel hit discovery and validation of functionally diverse modulators of NCS-1 protein-protein interactions.Chemical science · 2026Article
- Developments and challenges in hit progression within fragment-based drug discovery.Nature communications · 2026Review
- Large scale prospective evaluation of co-folding across 557 Mac1-ligand complexes and three virtual screens.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Halogen bonds between ligands and proteins: Can we use them in validation?Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2025Article
- Ten rules for a structural bioinformatic analysis.PLoS computational biology · 2025Article
- Crystallographic Fragment Screening of the Dengue Virus Polymerase Reveals Multiple Binding Sites for the Development of Non-nucleoside Antiflavivirals.Journal of medicinal chemistry · 2025Article
- Regional and National Shared Research Resources: Challenges and Opportunities§.Journal of biomolecular techniques : JBT · 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Fragment screening by crystallography has recently skyrocketed. Multiple synchrotrons have built specialized screening platforms, established workflows, and assembled compound libraries. Crystallographic fragment screening is now widely accessible to groups that had previously not considered the approach. While hundreds of crystallographic fragment-screening campaigns have been conducted in the last few years, most of the underlying data have neither been published nor made publicly accessible. This perspective highlights the importance of establishing effective mechanisms for preserving large and often heterogeneous groups of datasets intrinsic to crystallographic fragment-screening campaigns, thereby ensuring their accessibility for advancing research and enabling applications such as training AI-based models.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.