↓ Skip to main content

Evaluation of a novel virtual screening strategy using receptor decoy binding sites

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Negative Results in BioMedicine, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
22 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Evaluation of a novel virtual screening strategy using receptor decoy binding sites
Published in
Journal of Negative Results in BioMedicine, August 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12952-016-0058-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hershna Patel, Andreas Kukol

Abstract

Virtual screening is used in biomedical research to predict the binding affinity of a large set of small organic molecules to protein receptor targets. This report shows the development and evaluation of a novel yet straightforward attempt to improve this ranking in receptor-based molecular docking using a receptor-decoy strategy. This strategy includes defining a decoy binding site on the receptor and adjusting the ranking of the true binding-site virtual screen based on the decoy-site screen. The results show that by docking against a receptor-decoy site with Autodock Vina, improved Receiver Operator Characteristic Enrichment (ROCE) was achieved for 5 out of fifteen receptor targets investigated, when up to 15 % of a decoy site rank list was considered. No improved enrichment was seen for 7 targets, while for 3 targets the ROCE was reduced. The extent to which this strategy can effectively improve ligand prediction is dependent on the target receptor investigated.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 22 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 23%
Student > Bachelor 3 14%
Researcher 2 9%
Student > Postgraduate 2 9%
Student > Master 2 9%
Other 3 14%
Unknown 5 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 18%
Chemistry 3 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 9%
Mathematics 1 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 5%
Other 5 23%
Unknown 6 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 31 August 2016.
All research outputs
#20,656,820
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Negative Results in BioMedicine
#82
of 113 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#276,469
of 354,261 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Negative Results in BioMedicine
#2
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 113 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 354,261 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.