ArticleScientific reports2025
A robust and statistical analyzed predictive model for drug toxicity using machine learning.
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.
- From Algorithms to Assets: A Comprehensive Review of AI's Role in Preclinical Drug Discovery and the Hurdles to Clinical Translation.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- DistRMI: a deep distance-aware neural network for explainable RNA loop motif-small molecule interaction prediction.Briefings in bioinformatics · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Over the years, toxicity prediction has been a challenging task. Artificial intelligence and machine learning provide a platform to study toxicity prediction more accurately with a reduced time span. An optimized ensembled model is used to contrast the results of seven machine learning algorithms and three deep learning models with regard to state-of-the-art parameters. In the paper, optimized model is developed that combined eager random forest and sluggish k star techniques. State-of-the-art parameters have been evaluated and compared for three scenarios. In first scenario with original features, in the second scenario using feature selection and resampling technique with the percentage split method, and in the third scenario using feature selection and resampling technique with 10-fold cross-validation. The principal component analysis is performed for feature selection. An optimized ensembled model performs well in comparison to other models in all three scenarios. It achieved an accuracy of 77% in the first scenario, 89% in the second scenario, and 93% in the third scenario. The proposed model shows the performance increase in accuracy by 8% as compared to the top performer Kstar machine learning model and 21% as compared to deep learning model AIPs-DeepEnC-GA which is remarkable. Also there is significant improvement in other important evaluation parameters in comparison to top performing models. Further concept of W-saw score and L-saw is presented for all the scenarios. An optimized ensembled model using feature selection and resampling technique with tenfold cross-validation performs best among all machine learning models in all the scenarios.
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.