ArticleSAR and QSAR in environmental research2017
Application of IATA - A case study in evaluating the global and local performance of a Bayesian network model for skin sensitization.
Article in SAR and QSAR in environmental research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Progress in data interoperability to support computational toxicology and chemical safety evaluation.Toxicology and applied pharmacology · 2019Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The information characterizing key events in an Adverse Outcome Pathway (AOP) can be generated from in silico, in chemico, in vitro and in vivo approaches. Integration of this information and interpretation for decision making are known as integrated approaches to testing and assessment (IATA). One such IATA was published by Jaworska et al., which describes a Bayesian network model known as ITS-2. The current work evaluated the performance of ITS-2 using a stratified cross-validation approach. We also characterized the impact of replacing the most significant component of the network, output from the expert system TIMES-SS, with structural alert information from the OECD Toolbox and Toxtree. Lack of structural alerts or TIMES-SS predictions yielded a sensitization potential prediction of 79%. If the TIMES-SS prediction was replaced by a structural alert indicator, the network predictivity increased up to 87%. The original network's predictivity was 89%. The local applicability domain of the original ITS-2 network was also evaluated using reaction mechanistic domains to understand what types of chemicals ITS-2 was able to make the best predictions for. We found that the original network was successful at predicting which chemicals would be sensitizers, but not at predicting their potency.
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.