ArticleScientific reports2025
An automated classification pipeline for tables in pharmacokinetic literature.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- Machine learning-based unified models for predicting drug clearance from pharmacokinetic animal and study design variables.PloS one · 2026Article
- AutoPK: Leveraging LLMs and a Hybrid Similarity Metric for Advanced Retrieval of Pharmacokinetic Data from Complex Tables and Documents.International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence : [proceedings]. International Conference on Tools for Artificial Intelligence · 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pharmacokinetic (PK) models are essential for optimising drug candidate selection and dosing regimens in drug development. Preclinical and population PK models benefit from integrating prior knowledge from existing compounds. While tables in scientific literature contain comprehensive prior PK data and critical contextual information, the lack of automated extraction tools forces researchers to manually curate datasets, limiting efficiency and scalability. This study addresses this gap by focusing on the crucial first step of PK table mining: automatically identifying tables containing in vivo PK parameters and study population characteristics. To this end, an expert-annotated corpus of 2640 tables from PK literature was developed and used to train a supervised classification pipeline. The pipeline integrates diverse table features and representations, with GPT-4 refining predictions in uncertain cases. The resulting model achieved F1 scores exceeding 96% across all classes. The pipeline was applied to PK papers from PubMed Central Open-Access, with results integrated into the PK paper search tool at www.pkpdai.com . This work establishes a foundational step towards automating PK table data extraction and streamlining dataset curation. The corpus and code are openly available.
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.