These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Journal Abstract Search

537 related items for PubMed ID: 18211051

  • 21.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 22.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 23. Consensus scoring criteria for improving enrichment in virtual screening.
    Yang JM, Chen YF, Shen TW, Kristal BS, Hsu DF.
    J Chem Inf Model; 2005; 45(4):1134-46. PubMed ID: 16045308
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 24.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 25.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 26.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 27. Interpretation of scoring functions using 3D molecular fields. Mapping the diacyl-hydrazine-binding pocket of an insect ecdysone receptor.
    Bordas B, Belai I, Lopata A, Szanto Z.
    J Chem Inf Model; 2007; 47(1):176-85. PubMed ID: 17238263
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 28.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 29. Consensus scoring with feature selection for structure-based virtual screening.
    Teramoto R, Fukunishi H.
    J Chem Inf Model; 2008 Feb; 48(2):288-95. PubMed ID: 18229906
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 30.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 31. Bootstrap-based consensus scoring method for protein-ligand docking.
    Fukunishi H, Teramoto R, Takada T, Shimada J.
    J Chem Inf Model; 2008 May; 48(5):988-96. PubMed ID: 18426197
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 32.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 33. The consequences of scoring docked ligand conformations using free energy correlations.
    Spyrakis F, Amadasi A, Fornabaio M, Abraham DJ, Mozzarelli A, Kellogg GE, Cozzini P.
    Eur J Med Chem; 2007 Jul; 42(7):921-33. PubMed ID: 17346861
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 34. Testing assumptions and hypotheses for rescoring success in protein-ligand docking.
    O'Boyle NM, Liebeschuetz JW, Cole JC.
    J Chem Inf Model; 2009 Aug; 49(8):1871-8. PubMed ID: 19645429
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 35.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 36. Virtual screening to enrich a compound collection with CDK2 inhibitors using docking, scoring, and composite scoring models.
    Cotesta S, Giordanetto F, Trosset JY, Crivori P, Kroemer RT, Stouten PF, Vulpetti A.
    Proteins; 2005 Sep 01; 60(4):629-43. PubMed ID: 16028223
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 37.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 38.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 39. Comparative binding energy analysis for binding affinity and target selectivity prediction.
    Henrich S, Feierberg I, Wang T, Blomberg N, Wade RC.
    Proteins; 2010 Jan 01; 78(1):135-53. PubMed ID: 19768680
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 40.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Previous] [Next] [New Search]
    of 27.