↓ Skip to main content

3D-QSAR study of hallucinogenic phenylalkylamines by using CoMFA approach

Overview of attention for article published in Perspectives in Drug Discovery and Design, January 2007
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
28 Mendeley
Title
3D-QSAR study of hallucinogenic phenylalkylamines by using CoMFA approach
Published in
Perspectives in Drug Discovery and Design, January 2007
DOI 10.1007/s10822-006-9090-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Zhuoyong Zhang, Liying An, Wenxiang Hu, Yuhong Xiang

Abstract

The three-dimensional quantitative structure-activity relationship (3D-QSAR) has been studied on 90 hallucinogenic phenylalkylamines by the comparative molecular field analysis (CoMFA). Two conformations were compared during the modeling. Conformation I referred to the amino group close to ring position 6 and conformation II related to the amino group trans to the phenyl ring. Satisfactory results were obtained by using both conformations. There were still differences between the two models. The model based on conformation I got better statistical results than the one about conformation II. And this may suggest that conformation I be preponderant when the hallucinogenic phenylalkylamines interact with the receptor. To further confirm the predictive capability of the CoMFA model, 18 compounds with conformation I were randomly selected as a test set and the remaining ones as training set. The best CoMFA model based on the training set had a cross-validation coefficient q (2) of 0.549 at five components and non cross-validation coefficient R (2) of 0.835, the standard error of estimation was 0.219. The model showed good predictive ability in the external test with a coefficient R (pre) (2) of 0.611. The CoMFA coefficient contour maps suggested that both steric and electrostatic interactions play an important role. The contributions from the steric and electrostatic fields were 0.450 and 0.550, respectively.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Russia 1 4%
Unknown 27 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 21%
Unspecified 3 11%
Professor 3 11%
Researcher 3 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 11%
Other 5 18%
Unknown 5 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Chemistry 7 25%
Psychology 4 14%
Unspecified 3 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 11%
Computer Science 1 4%
Other 5 18%
Unknown 5 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 10 June 2021.
All research outputs
#8,571,053
of 25,457,858 outputs
Outputs from Perspectives in Drug Discovery and Design
#420
of 949 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#45,452
of 169,149 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Perspectives in Drug Discovery and Design
#4
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,858 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 949 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.3. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% 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 169,149 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 6 of them.