Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38112716›Full record

ArticleArchives of toxicology2024

An interactive tool for designing efficient toxicology experiments.

William Gertsch, Weng Kee Wong

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of toxicology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

William GertschDepartment of Biostatistics, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA. willgertsch@ucla.edu.ORCID 0009-0003-0307-438X
Weng Kee WongDepartment of Biostatistics, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The design of dose-response experiments is an important part of toxicology research. Efficient design of these experiments requires choosing optimal doses and assigning the correct number of subjects to those doses under a given criterion. Optimal design theory provides the tools to find the most efficient experimental designs in terms of cost and statistical efficiency. However, the mathematical details can be distracting and make these designs inaccessible to many toxicologists. To facilitate use of these designs, we present an easy to use web-app for finding two types of optimal designs for models commonly used in toxicology. We include tools for checking the optimality of a given design and for assessing efficiency of any user-supplied design. Using state-of-the-art nature-inspired metaheuristic algorithms, the web-app allows the user to quickly find optimal designs for estimating model parameters or the benchmark dose.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsResearch DesignBenchmarkingDose-Response Relationship, DrugHumansBenchmark doseDesign efficiencyDose–response experimentsOptimal designR Shiny

Identifiers

PMID38112716

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.