ArticleRisk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis2025
Reducing uncertainty in dose-response assessments by incorporating Bayesian benchmark dose modeling and in vitro data on population variability.
Article in Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Extrapolation steps in quantitativeCurrent research in toxicology · 2026Review
- Fetal response to maternal exposures of environmental chemicals: Utility of a four-cell human feto-maternal interface organ-on-chip.Chemico-biological interactions · 2025Article
- bmdrc: Python package for quantifying phenotypes from chemical exposures with benchmark dose modeling.PLoS computational biology · 2025Article
- Reducing uncertainty in dose-response assessments by incorporating Bayesian benchmark dose modeling and in vitro data on population variability.Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis · 2025Article
- 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
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
There are two primary sources of uncertainty in the interpretability of toxicity values, like the reference dose (RfD): estimates of the point of departure (POD) and the absence of chemical-specific human variability data. We hypothesize two solutions-employing Bayesian benchmark dose (BBMD) modeling to refine POD determination and combining high-throughput toxicokinetic modeling with population-based toxicodynamic in vitro data to characterize chemical-specific variability. These hypotheses were tested by deriving refined probabilistic estimates for human doses corresponding to a specific effect size (M) in the Ith population percentile (HD
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.