ArticleEnvironmental health perspectives2017
Comparison of Points of Departure for Health Risk Assessment Based on High-Throughput Screening Data.
Article in Environmental health perspectives, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Principles of Food Safety and Toxicological Risk Assessment: Refining Hazards, Risk Management Communication, and Common Misconceptions.Comprehensive reviews in food science and food safety · 2026Review
- Application of in vitro to in vivo extrapolation (IVIVE) to inform chemical health guidance value derivation-sample case studies comparing neuro-, hepato-, and developmental toxicities.Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology · 2026Article
- Liquid Crystal Monomers and Their Mixtures Alter Nuclear Receptor Signaling and Promote Adipogenesis In Vitro.Endocrinology · 2025Article
- Derivation of metabolic point of departure using high-throughput in vitro metabolomics: investigating the importance of sampling time points on benchmark concentration values in the HepaRG cell line.Archives of toxicology · 2023Article
- A value of information framework for assessing the trade-offs associated with uncertainty, duration, and cost of chemical toxicity testing.Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis · 2023Article
- Characterization of ENM Dynamic Dose-Dependent MOA in Lung with Respect to Immune Cells Infiltration.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- In Silico Models for Repeated-Dose Toxicity (RDT): Prediction of the No Observed Adverse Effect Level (NOAEL) and Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Level (LOAEL) for Drugs.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2022Article
- Health effects from freshly emitted versus oxidatively or photochemically aged air pollutants.The Science of the total environment · 2020Review
- Dose-Related Severity Sequence, and Risk-Based Integration, of Chemically Induced Health Effects.Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology · 2018Article
- Bridging the Data Gap FromFrontiers in public health · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe National Research Council's vision for toxicity testing in the 21st century anticipates that points of departure (PODs) for establishing human exposure guidelines in future risk assessments will increasingly be based on
objectivesThe aim of this study was to compare different PODs for HTS data. Specifically, benchmark doses (BMDs) were compared to the signal-to-noise crossover dose (SNCD), which has been suggested as the lowest dose applicable as a POD.
methodsHill models were fit to > 10,000
resultsThe BMDL
conclusionsThe SNCD may serve as a reference level that guides the determination of standardized BMDs for risk assessment based on HTS concentration-response data. The SNCD may also have application as a POD for low-dose extrapolation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.