Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25449657›Full record

ArticleDrug discovery today2015

Quantitative high-throughput screening data analysis: challenges and recent advances.

Keith R Shockley

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Drug discovery today, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Accounting for Artifacts in High-Throughput Toxicity Assays.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2022
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Dose-Related Severity Sequence, and Risk-Based Integration, of Chemically Induced Health Effects.Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology · 2018
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Keith R ShockleyBiostatistics and Computational Biology Branch, The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA. Electronic address: shockleykr@niehs.nih.gov.

Funding

Analysis of Quantitative High Throughput Screening DataZIAES102865 · NIEHS · NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SCIENCES · PI SHOCKLEY, KEITH · 2010 to 2025
$2.8M
Intramural NIH HHS ZIA ES102865
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In vitro HTS holds much potential to advance drug discovery and provide cell-based alternatives for toxicity testing. In quantitative HTS, concentration-response data can be generated simultaneously for thousands of different compounds and mixtures. However, nonlinear modeling in these multiple-concentration assays presents important statistical challenges that are not problematic for linear models. The uncertainty of parameter estimates obtained from the widely used Hill equation model can be extremely large when using standard designs. Failure to properly consider standard errors of these parameter estimates would greatly hinder chemical genomics and toxicity testing efforts. In this light, optimal study designs should be developed to improve nonlinear parameter estimation; or alternative approaches with reliable performance characteristics should be used to describe concentration-response profiles.

Indexed as

Data Interpretation, StatisticalDrug DiscoveryHigh-Throughput Screening AssaysNonlinear DynamicsRegression Analysis

Identifiers

PMID25449657
PMCPMC4375054

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.