ArticleComputational toxicology (Amsterdam, Netherlands)2024
Guided optimization of ToxPi model weights using a Semi-Automated approach.
Article in Computational toxicology (Amsterdam, Netherlands), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Beyond Steady-State: An Integrated Framework Unveils BPAP as the Highest-Risk Bisphenol in a Dynamic River System.Toxics · 2026Article
- Occurrence, Sources, and Prioritization of Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in Drinking Water from Yangtze River Delta, China: Focusing on Emerging PFASs.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Article
- A novel approach for measuring allostatic load highlights differences in stress burdens due to race, sex and smoking status.PloS one · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The Toxicological Prioritization Index (ToxPi) is a visual analysis and decision support tool for dimension reduction and visualization of high throughput, multi-dimensional feature data. ToxPi was originally developed for assessing the relative toxicity of multiple chemicals or stressors by synthesizing complex toxicological data to provide a single comprehensive view of the potential health effects. It continues to be used for profiling chemicals and has since been applied to other types of "sample" entities, including geospatial (e.g. county-level Covid-19 risk and sites of historical PFAS exposure) and other profiling applications. For any set of features (data collected on a set of sample entities), ToxPi integrates the data into a set of weighted slices that provide a visual profile and a score metric for comparison. This scoring system is highly dependent on user-provided feature weights, yet users often lack knowledge of how to define these feature weights. Common methods for predicting feature weights are generally unusable due to inappropriate statistical assumptions and lack of global distributional expectation. However, users often have an inherent understanding of expected results for a small subset of samples. For example, in chemical toxicity, prior knowledge can often place subsets of chemicals into categories of low, moderate or high toxicity (reference chemicals). Ordinal regression can be used to predict weights based on these response levels that are applicable to the entire feature set, analogous to using positive and negative controls to contextualize an empirical distribution. We propose a semi-supervised method utilizing ordinal regression to predict a set of feature weights that produces the best fit for the known response ("reference") data and subsequently fine-tunes the weights via a customized genetic algorithm. We conduct a simulation study to show when this method can improve the results of ordinal regression, allowing for accurate feature weight prediction and sample ranking in scenarios with minimal response data. To ground-truth the guided weight optimization, we test this method on published data to build a ToxPi model for comparison against expert-knowledge-driven weight assignments.
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.