ArticleDatabase : the journal of biological databases and curation2025
The impact of curation errors in the PDBBind Database on machine learning predictions of protein-protein binding affinity.
Article in Database : the journal of biological databases and curation, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- 3D Geometric Equivariant Graph Neural Networks with Contrastive Learning for Protein-Ligand Binding Affinity Prediction.Interdisciplinary sciences, computational life sciences · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The PDBBind database has been widely utilized for the computational prediction of protein-protein binding affinities. While the accuracy of the PDBBind-curated equilibrium dissociation constants (KD) has been reported for the protein-ligand subset of the PDBBind database, the curation accuracy has not been reported for the protein-protein subset. Here, we present a detailed manual analysis for the subset of PDBBind records with PubMed Central Open Access primary publications and find that ~19% of these records had KD values that were not supported by their primary publications. The impact of these putative curation errors on the machine learning-based prediction of KD from experimental protein-protein 3D structures was evaluated and correcting the curation errors improved the Pearson correlation coefficient between measured and random forest-predicted log10(KD) values by ~8 percentage points. This finding underscores the importance of dataset accuracy for computational modelling and highlights the need for more stringent curation processes when extracting information from the scientific literature.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.