ArticleNucleic acids research2026
New targets and procedures for validating the valence geometry of nucleic acid structures.
Article in Nucleic acids research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparative assessment of crystallographic and cryo-EM models in the Protein Data Bank.FEBS open bio · 2026Article
- Conformational analysis of nucleic acids for optimizing DNA and RNA topological models.Nucleic acids research · 2026Article
- DNATCO v5.0: integrated web platform for 3D nucleic acid structure analysis.Nucleic acids research · 2026Article
- New targets and procedures for validating the valence geometry of nucleic acid structures.Nucleic acids research · 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
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
A Working Group consisting of the co-authors of this paper was established in 2020 to re-evaluate the standard valence geometry used for the validation of nucleic acid structure models in the Protein Data Bank (PDB). This Working Group re-examined the dependence of Cambridge Structural Database (CSD) derived targets on base and sugar type, sugar pucker, and phosphate and glycosidic conformation, before comparing those targets with the geometry of a quality-filtered reference set of nucleic acid crystal structural models held in the PDB. This revealed that the valence bond and angle mean values are close to the CSD targets, but many parameters have highly non-Gaussian or even multimodal distributions. One explanation is the inconsistency of restraints used over time and by different refinement programs. The Working Group recommends a new validation scheme for use by the PDB. For this purpose, we have developed a new three-tier scale for outlier detection-graded as Preferred, Allowed, and Of Concern intervals-based on a combination of quality-curated reference data from the CSD and the PDB. The proposed approach to validation should lead to improved nucleic acid models in (future) PDB-deposited macromolecular structures.
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.