ArticleRisk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis2025
Benchmark dose modeling for epidemiological dose-response assessment using case-control studies.
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Benchmark dose modeling for epidemiological dose-response assessment using case-control studies.Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis · 2025Article
- Environmental Risk Assessment of Trace Metal Pollution: A Statistical Perspective.Environmental geochemistry and health · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Following a previous article that focused on integrating epidemiological data from prospective cohort studies into toxicological risk assessment, this paper shifts the focus to case-control studies. Specifically, it utilizes the odds ratio (OR) as the main epidemiological measure, aligning it with the benchmark dose (BMD) methodology as the standard dose-response modeling approach to determine chemical toxicity values for regulatory risk assessment. A standardized BMD analysis framework has been established for toxicological data, including input data requirements, dose-response models, definitions of benchmark response, and consideration of model uncertainty. This framework has been enhanced by recent methods capable of handling both cohort and case-control studies using summary data that have been adjusted for confounders. The present study aims to investigate and compare the "effective count" based BMD modeling approach, merged with an algorithm used for converting odds ratio to relative risk in cohort studies with partial data information (i.e., the Wang algorithm), with the adjusted OR-based BMD analysis approach. The goal is to develop an adequate BMD modeling framework that can be generalized for analyzing published case-control study data. As in the previous study, these methods were applied to a database examining the association between bladder and lung cancer and inorganic arsenic exposure. The results indicate that estimated BMDs and BMDLs are relatively consistent across both methods. However, modeling adjusted OR values as continuous data for BMD estimation aligns better with established practices in toxicological BMD analysis, making it a more generalizable approach.
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.