Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35295161›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in toxicology2021

Development of the SciRAP Approach for Evaluating the Reliability and Relevance of

Nicolas Roth, Johanna Zilliacus, Anna Beronius

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in toxicology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 10 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 10 pooled it
–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

32 citing papers in PubMed, 10 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

3 authors.

Nicolas RothSwiss Centre for Applied Human Toxicology (SCAHT), University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Johanna ZilliacusInstitute of Environmental Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Solna, Sweden.
Anna BeroniusInstitute of Environmental Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Solna, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Efficient and successful integration of data generated from non-animal test methods must rely on reliable and relevant data. It is important therefore to develop tools and criteria that facilitate scientifically sound, structured, and transparent evaluation of reliability and relevance of

Indexed as

data qualityhealth risk assessment (HRA)in vitro datarelevancereliabilitySciRAP

Identifiers

PMID35295161
PMCPMC8915875

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.