ArticleProteins2026
Comparative Analysis of Deep Learning-Based Algorithms for Peptide Structure Prediction.
Article in Proteins, 2026. 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.
- Detecting and quantifying overparametrization in RNA language models with REDIAL.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Comparative Analysis of Deep Learning-Based Algorithms for Peptide Structure Prediction.Proteins · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
While of primary importance in both the biomedical and therapeutic fields, peptides suffer from a relative lack of dedicated tools to predict efficiently and accurately their 3D structures despite being a crucial step in understanding their physio-pathological function or designing new drugs. In recent years, deep-learning methods have enabled a major breakthrough for the protein 3D structure prediction approaches, allowing to predict protein 3D structures with a near-experimental accuracy for nearly any protein sequence. This present study aims at confronting some of these new methods (AlphaFold2, RoseTTAFold2, and ESMFold) for the peptides' 3D structure prediction problem and evaluating their performance. All methods produced high-quality results, but their overall performance is lower as compared to the prediction of protein 3D structures. We also identified a few structural features that impede the ability to produce high-quality peptide structure predictions. These findings point out the discrepancy that still exists between the protein and peptide 3D structure prediction methods and underline a few cases where the generated peptide structures should be used very cautiously.
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.