Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 163

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Qualitative prediction of blood–brain barrier permeability on a large and refined dataset

Open access
Muehlbacher, Markus, Spitzer, Gudrun M., Liedl, Klaus R., Kornhuber, Johannes·2011·Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design

Abstract

The prediction of blood-brain barrier permeation is vitally important for the optimization of drugs targeting the central nervous system as well as for avoiding side effects of peripheral drugs. Following a previously proposed model on blood-brain barrier penetration, we calculated the cross-sectional area perpendicular to the amphiphilic axis. We obtained a high correlation between calculated and experimental cross-sectional area (r = 0.898, n = 32). Based on these results, we examined a correlation of the calculated cross-sectional area with blood-brain barrier penetration given by logBB values. We combined various literature data sets to form a large-scale logBB dataset with 362 experimental logBB values. Quantitative models were calculated using bootstrap validated multiple linear regression. Qualitative models were built by a bootstrapped random forest algorithm. Both methods found similar descriptors such as polar surface area, pKa, logP, charges and number of positive ionisable groups to be predictive for logBB. In contrast to our initial assumption, we were not able to obtain models with the cross-sectional area chosen as relevant parameter for both approaches. Comparing those two different techniques, qualitative random forest models are better suited for blood-brain barrier permeability prediction, especially when reducing the number of descriptors and using a large dataset. A random forest prediction system (n(trees) = 5) based on only four descriptors yields a validated accuracy of 88%.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10822-011-9478-1

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 163

Metadata

Authors
Muehlbacher, M., Spitzer, G. M., Liedl, K. R., & Kornhuber, J.
Venue
Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design
Published
2011-11-23
Volume
25
Issue
12
Pages
1095-1106
ISSN
  • 0920-654X (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-4951
OpenAlex
W2043380313
Cited by
163
References
1
FWCI
5.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Qualitative prediction of blood–brain barrier permeability on a large and refined dataset. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s10822-011-9478-1
The paper
Muehlbacher, M., Spitzer, G. M., Liedl, K. R., & Kornhuber, J. (2011). Qualitative prediction of blood–brain barrier permeability on a large and refined dataset. Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10822-011-9478-1

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.