Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26126976›Full record

ArticleJournal of computer-aided molecular design2015

The challenges of making decisions using uncertain data.

Matthew D Segall, Edmund J Champness

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of computer-aided molecular design, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Imputation of sensory properties using deep learning.Journal of computer-aided molecular design · 2021
    Article
  3. Review
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

2 authors.

Matthew D SegallOptibrium Ltd, 7221 Cambridge Research Park, Beach Drive, Cambridge, CB25 9TL, UK. matt.segall@optibrium.com.
Edmund J ChampnessOptibrium Ltd, 7221 Cambridge Research Park, Beach Drive, Cambridge, CB25 9TL, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

All of the experimental compound data with which we work have significant uncertainties, due to imperfect correlations between experimental systems and the ultimate in vivo properties of compounds and the inherent variability in experimental conditions. When using these data to make decisions, it is essential that these uncertainties are taken into account to avoid making inappropriate decisions in the selection of compounds, which can lead to wasted effort and missed opportunities. In this paper we will consider approaches to rigorously account for uncertainties when selecting between compounds or assessing compounds against a property criterion; first for an individual measurement of a single property and then for multiple measurements of a property for the same compound. We will then explore how uncertainties in multiple properties can be combined when assessing compounds against a profile of criteria, a process known as multi-parameter optimisation. This guides rigorous decision-making using complex, uncertain data to focus on compounds with the best chance of success, while avoiding missed opportunities by inappropriately rejecting compounds.

Indexed as

Data Interpretation, StatisticalDecision MakingData AccuracyDrug DiscoveryInactivation, MetabolicPharmacokineticsProbabilityTissue DistributionUncertaintyCompound optimisationDesirability functionDrug discoveryMulti-parameter optimisationProbabilityUncertainty

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.