A Perspective on the Evolution of Collaborative Drug Discovery and Future Challenges
Collaborative Innovation in Drug Discovery: Strategies for Public and Private Partnerships, Page: 75-84
2014
- 6Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Captures6
- Readers6
Book Chapter Description
Views about collaborative drug discovery changed from caution to advocacy in a few years. Milestones were the 2004 NIH Molecular Libraries Screening Center Network and library with screening data deposited to Pubchem; the 2008 Wellcome Trust transfer of proprietary chemogenomic data to the public; and in 2008, the formalization of collaborative efforts in the Clinical and Translational Science Pharmaceutical Assets Award portal. The biology/medicinal chemistry interface is difficult in academic drug discovery, with its wide range in academic drug discovery skills sets. Academics talk about innovation, thinking out of the box, maximum chemical diversity, and not being limited by preconceived rules and filters. Industry people talk about pragmatism, lessons learned, and about worthless screening compounds. Chemistry space errors impede academic drug discovery and collaborations. Screening diverse libraries is the worst way to discover a drug. Biologically active compounds occur in small tight clusters infrequently through chemistry space. Currently, well-known problematic functionality is replaced with more subtle problem compounds. Medicinal chemistry quality suffers when the academic choice is publish or perish. Hypothesis-driven research is a concern for future collaborative drug discovery because biology research driven by hypothesis can often be wrong. Complex natural products cannot be analyzed because the shapes are uncertain. This hinders exploitation of natural products in drug discovery and chemical biology.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know