ArticleEnvironmental science & technology2024
Two-Stage Machine Learning-Based Approach to Predict Points of Departure for Human Noncancer and Developmental/Reproductive Effects.
Article in Environmental science & technology, 2024. 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.
- Human vs. cells vs. machine: A comparative analysis of toxicological points of departure derived from quantitative read-across (qRAx), in vitro data, and In silico predictions.Regulatory toxicology and pharmacology : RTP · 2026Article
- Molecular Representation and Closed-Loop Validation for Toxicity Assessment of Organic Compounds in Ambient Air PMEnvironmental science & technology · 2026Article
- Uncertainty-aware machine learning to predict non-cancer human toxicity for the global chemicals market.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Developmental toxicity: artificial intelligence-powered assessments.Trends in pharmacological sciences · 2025Review
- Incorporating new approach methods (NAMs) data in dose-response assessments: The future is now!Journal of toxicology and environmental health. Part B, Critical reviews · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Chemical points of departure (PODs) for critical health effects are crucial for evaluating and managing human health risks and impacts from exposure. However, PODs are unavailable for most chemicals in commerce due to a lack of
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.