ArticleRegulatory toxicology and pharmacology : RTP2022
A scheme to evaluate structural alerts to predict toxicity - Assessing confidence by characterising uncertainties.
Article in Regulatory toxicology and pharmacology : RTP, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Integrating Transcriptomic and Targeted New Approach Methodologies into a Tiered Framework for Chemical Bioactivity Screening.Environmental health perspectives · 2025Article
- Development, Use, and Validation of (Q)SARs for Predicting Genotoxicity and Carcinogenicity: Experiences from Italian National Institute of Health Activities.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2025Article
- Molecular similarity in chemical informatics and predictive toxicity modeling: from quantitative read-across (q-RA) to quantitative read-across structure-activity relationship (q-RASAR) with the application of machine learning.Critical reviews in toxicology · 2024Review
- AI and ML-based risk assessment of chemicals: predicting carcinogenic risk from chemical-induced genomic instability.Frontiers in toxicology · 2024Review
- Construction of an In Silico Structural Profiling Tool Facilitating Mechanistically Grounded Classification of Aquatic Toxicants.Environmental science & technology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Structure-activity relationships (SARs) in toxicology have enabled the formation of structural rules which, when coded as structural alerts, are essential tools in in silico toxicology. Whilst other in silico methods have approaches for their evaluation, there is no formal process to assess the confidence that may be associated with a structural alert. This investigation proposes twelve criteria to assess the uncertainty associated with structural alerts, allowing for an assessment of confidence. The criteria are based around the stated purpose, description of the chemistry, toxicology and mechanism, performance and coverage, as well as corroborating and supporting evidence of the alert. Alerts can be given a confidence assessment and score, enabling the identification of areas where more information may be beneficial. The scheme to evaluate structural alerts was placed in the context of various use cases for industrial and regulatory applications. The analysis of alerts, and consideration of the evaluation scheme, identifies the different characteristics an alert may have, such as being highly specific or generic. These characteristics may determine when an alert can be used for specific uses such as identification of analogues for read-across or hazard identification.
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.