Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34027244›Full record

ReviewComputational toxicology (Amsterdam, Netherlands)2021

Gaining acceptance in next generation PBK modelling approaches for regulatory assessments - An OECD international effort.

Alicia Paini, Yu-Mei Tan, Magdalini Sachana, Andrew Worth

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Computational toxicology (Amsterdam, Netherlands), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Are Non-animal Systemic Safety Assessments Protective? A Toolbox and Workflow.Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology · 2022
    Article
  12. 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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Alicia PainiEuropean Commission, Joint Research Centre (JRC), Ispra, Italy.
Yu-Mei TanU.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Pesticide Programs, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA.
Magdalini SachanaEnvironment Health and Safety Division, Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), Paris, France.
Andrew WorthEuropean Commission, Joint Research Centre (JRC), Ispra, Italy.
Joint Research Centre · ITEnvironmental Protection Agency · USOrganisation de Coopération et de Développement Economiques · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Physiologically Based Kinetic (PBK) models are valuable tools to help define safe external levels of chemicals based on internal doses at target organs in experimental animals, humans and organisms used in environmental risk assessment. As the toxicity testing paradigm shifts to alternative testing approaches, PBK model development has started to rely (mostly or entirely) on model parameters quantified using

Indexed as

HarmonisationHuman and environmental safety assessmentOECDPBK modelRisk assessment

Identifiers

PMID34027244
PMCPMC8130668
OpenAlexW3134421859

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.