 Even experienced medicinal chemists may find the task of executing and interpreting the results of 2D, 3D and substructure searching the 98 million compounds in PubChem, the 150 million in SciFinder or the11 billion virtual enumerations in the Enamine REAL collection daunting, since the three resources are very different.  Team members doing a good job on their in-house SAR assays may be unfamiliar with interrogating the 265 million results in PubChemBioassay as well as the 1 million results associated with the 1.9 million compounds in ChEMBL (these two sources also being very different).  A disease biologist may at least familiar to some extent with the UniProt entries for their protein target and pathway components. However, deep expertise is needed to interrogate resources such as Ensembl, Open Targets, and the genome Aggregation Database (gnomAD). This is necessary to comprehensively explore genomic variation and possible disease association data relevant to their target, including paralogues with cross-reactivity and model organism orthologues.  Team members can doubtless execute keyword queries in PubMed and European PubMed Central (EPMC). However, they would find it difficult to fully exploit the advanced functionality of both (yet again very different portals) for navigating the deep connectivity between PubMed, PubChem, MeSH and Entrez, following out the automatic entity mark-ups and database links in EPMC or even going beyond these portals by using Natural Language Processing (NLP) text mining to extend relationship exploration (here again, despite good Help documentation on both sides of the Atlantic, there are no benchmarked best-practice guidelines).  There are likely to have little experience either with commercial CI databases or grappling with the redundant, dense and confusing patent documents found in such sources.