ArticleToxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology2024
Identifying assessment criteria for in vitro studies: a method and item bank.
Article in Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Chemical disruption of placental thyroid hormone signalling: a systematic review that highlights sex-specific effects.Archives of toxicology · 2026Pooled it
- Biogenic Selenium Nanoparticles Functionalized with Natural Polymers or Phytochemicals for Targeted Disruption ofJournal of functional biomaterials · 2026Review
- AI for dental imaging: impressive in vitro, but what about in practice?Evidence-based dentistry · 2025Article
- Assessing risk of bias in toxicological studies in the era of artificial intelligence.Archives of toxicology · 2025Review
- Laser Photobiomodulation: What Are the Ideal Parameters for Each Type of Laser Used in Dental Practice to Promote Fibroblast Proliferation and Differentiation? A Systematic Review.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- A comprehensive item bank of internal validity issues of relevance to in vitro toxicology studies.Evidence-based toxicology · 2024Article
- Protocol for designing INVITES-IN, a tool for assessing the internal validity ofEvidence-based toxicology · 2023Article
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
To support the development of appraisal tools for assessing the quality of in vitro studies, we developed a method for literature-based discovery of study assessment criteria, used the method to create an item bank of assessment criteria of potential relevance to in vitro studies, and analyzed the item bank to discern and critique current approaches for appraisal of in vitro studies. We searched four research indexes and included any document that identified itself as an appraisal tool for in vitro studies, was a systematic review that included a critical appraisal step, or was a reporting checklist for in vitro studies. We abstracted, normalized, and categorized all criteria applied by the included appraisal tools to create an "item bank" database of issues relevant to the assessment of in vitro studies. The resulting item bank consists of 676 unique appraisal concepts from 67 appraisal tools. We believe this item bank is the single most comprehensive resource of its type to date, should be of high utility for future tool development exercises, and provides a robust methodology for grounding tool development in the existing literature. Although we set out to develop an item bank specifically targeting in vitro studies, we found that many of the assessment concepts we discovered are readily applicable to other study designs. Item banks can be of significant value as a resource; however, there are important challenges in developing, maintaining, and extending them of which researchers should be aware.
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.