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

206 related items for PubMed ID: 20690627

  • 1.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. Comprehensive comparison of ligand-based virtual screening tools against the DUD data set reveals limitations of current 3D methods.
    Venkatraman V, Pérez-Nueno VI, Mavridis L, Ritchie DW.
    J Chem Inf Model; 2010 Dec 27; 50(12):2079-93. PubMed ID: 21090728
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. Virtual screening using protein-ligand docking: avoiding artificial enrichment.
    Verdonk ML, Berdini V, Hartshorn MJ, Mooij WT, Murray CW, Taylor RD, Watson P.
    J Chem Inf Comput Sci; 2004 Dec 27; 44(3):793-806. PubMed ID: 15154744
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. Protein flexibility in ligand docking and virtual screening to protein kinases.
    Cavasotto CN, Abagyan RA.
    J Mol Biol; 2004 Mar 12; 337(1):209-25. PubMed ID: 15001363
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7. Comparison of ligand- and structure-based virtual screening on the DUD data set.
    von Korff M, Freyss J, Sander T.
    J Chem Inf Model; 2009 Feb 12; 49(2):209-31. PubMed ID: 19434824
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8. ParaDockS: a framework for molecular docking with population-based metaheuristics.
    Meier R, Pippel M, Brandt F, Sippl W, Baldauf C.
    J Chem Inf Model; 2010 May 24; 50(5):879-89. PubMed ID: 20415499
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. Consensus scoring criteria for improving enrichment in virtual screening.
    Yang JM, Chen YF, Shen TW, Kristal BS, Hsu DF.
    J Chem Inf Model; 2005 May 24; 45(4):1134-46. PubMed ID: 16045308
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. LigMatch: a multiple structure-based ligand matching method for 3D virtual screening.
    Kinnings SL, Jackson RM.
    J Chem Inf Model; 2009 Sep 24; 49(9):2056-66. PubMed ID: 19685924
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12. Ligand bias of scoring functions in structure-based virtual screening.
    Jacobsson M, Karlén A.
    J Chem Inf Model; 2006 Sep 24; 46(3):1334-43. PubMed ID: 16711752
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. Analysis and optimization of structure-based virtual screening protocols. 2. Examination of docked ligand orientation sampling methodology: mapping a pharmacophore for success.
    Good AC, Cheney DL, Sitkoff DF, Tokarski JS, Stouch TR, Bassolino DA, Krystek SR, Li Y, Mason JS, Perkins TD.
    J Mol Graph Model; 2003 Sep 24; 22(1):31-40. PubMed ID: 12798389
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. Comparative evaluation of 3D virtual ligand screening methods: impact of the molecular alignment on enrichment.
    Giganti D, Guillemain H, Spadoni JL, Nilges M, Zagury JF, Montes M.
    J Chem Inf Model; 2010 Jun 28; 50(6):992-1004. PubMed ID: 20527883
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20. Similarity metrics for ligands reflecting the similarity of the target proteins.
    Schuffenhauer A, Floersheim P, Acklin P, Jacoby E.
    J Chem Inf Comput Sci; 2003 Jun 28; 43(2):391-405. PubMed ID: 12653501
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 11.