Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34820591›Full record

ArticleComputational toxicology (Amsterdam, Netherlands)2021

FAIRification of nanosafety data to improve applicability of (Q)SAR approaches: A case study on

Cecilia Bossa, Cristina Andreoli, Martine Bakker, Flavia Barone, Isabella De Angelis, Nina Jeliazkova, Penny Nymark, Chiara Laura Battistelli

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article 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 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. 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

8 authors.

Cecilia BossaEnvironment and Health Department, Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Rome, Italy.
Cristina AndreoliEnvironment and Health Department, Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Rome, Italy.
Martine BakkerCentre for Safety of Substances and Products, National Institute of Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands.
Flavia BaroneEnvironment and Health Department, Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Rome, Italy.
Isabella De AngelisEnvironment and Health Department, Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Rome, Italy.
Nina JeliazkovaIdeaconsult Ltd., Sofia, Bulgaria.
Penny NymarkInstitute of Environmental Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Chiara Laura BattistelliEnvironment and Health Department, Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Rome, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

(Quantitative) structure-activity relationship ([Q]SAR) methodologies are widely applied to predict the (eco)toxicological effects of chemicals, and their use is envisaged in different regulatory frameworks for filling data gaps of untested substances. However, their application to the risk assessment of nanomaterials is still limited, also due to the scarcity of large and curated experimental datasets. Despite a great amount of nanosafety data having been produced over the last decade in international collaborative initiatives, their interpretation, integration and reuse has been hampered by several obstacles, such as poorly described (meta)data, non-standard terminology, lack of harmonized reporting formats and criteria. Recently, the FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable) principles have been established to guide the scientific community in good data management and stewardship. The EU H2020 Gov4Nano project, together with other international projects and initiatives, is addressing the challenge of improving nanosafety data FAIRness, for maximizing their availability, understanding, exchange and ultimately their reuse. These efforts are largely supported by the creation of a common Nanosafety Data Interface, which connects a row of project-specific databases applying the eNanoMapper data model. A wide variety of experimental data relating to characterization and effects of nanomaterials are stored in the database; however, the methods, protocols and parameters driving their generation are not fully mature. This article reports the progress of an ongoing case study in the Gov4nano project on the reuse of

Indexed as

AOP, Adverse Outcome PathwayECHA, European Chemicals AgencyFAIR, Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and ReusableFAIR principlesFpg, Formamido pyrimidine glycosilaseGenotoxicityIATA, Integrated Approaches to Testing and Assessmentin vitro Comet assayISA–Tab, Investigation/Study/Assay Tab-delimitedJRC, Joint Research CentreMIRCA, Minimum Information for Reporting Comet AssayNano-EHS, Nano Environment, Health and SafetyNanomaterialsNanosafety dataNMBP-13-2018 projects, Gov4Nano, NANORIGO and RiskGONENMBP, Horizon 2020 Advisory Group for Nanotechnologies, Advanced Materials, Biotechnology and Advanced Manufacturing and ProcessingNMs, nanomaterialsOECD, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and DevelopmentOTM, Olive tail moment(Q)SAR approaches(Q)SAR, (Quantitative) structure-activity relationshipREACH, Registration, Evaluation Authorisation and Restriction of ChemicalsSCGE, Single Cell Gel ElectrophoresisSOPs, Standard Operating Procedures

Identifiers

PMID34820591
PMCPMC8591730

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.