ArticleJournal of chemical information and modeling2025
Improved Machine Learning Predictions of EC50s Using Uncertainty Estimation from Dose-Response Data.
Article in Journal of chemical information and modeling, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- "The Dose Makes the Poison": Relevance of Paracelsus's Principle for Modern Chemical Hazard Assessment with New Approach Methodologies.Environmental science & technology · 2026Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In early-stage drug design, machine learning models often rely on compressed representations of data, where raw experimental results are distilled into a single metric per molecule through curve fitting. This process discards valuable information about the quality of the curve fit. In this study, we incorporated a fit-quality metric into machine learning models to capture the reliability of metrics for individual molecules. Using 40 data sets from PubChem (public) and BASF (private), we demonstrated that including this quality metric can significantly improve predictive performance without additional experiments. Four methods were tested: random forests with parametric bootstrap, weighted random forests, variable output smearing random forests, and weighted support vector regression. When using fit-quality metrics, at least one of these methods led to a statistically significant improvement on 31 of the 40 data sets. In the best case, these methods led to a 22% reduction in the root-mean-squared error of the models. Overall, our results demonstrate that by adapting data processing to account for curve fit quality, we can improve predictive performance across a range of different data sets.
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.