Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42369409›Full record

ArticleNAM journal2025

Development of

Takaho Asai, Kazuhiko Umeshita, Michiko Sakurai, Shinji Sakane

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in NAM journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Takaho AsaiSafety & Analysis, Sunstar Inc., 3-1 Asahi-machi, Takatsuki, Osaka 569-1195, Japan.
Kazuhiko UmeshitaSafety & Analysis, Sunstar Inc., 3-1 Asahi-machi, Takatsuki, Osaka 569-1195, Japan.
Michiko SakuraiSafety & Analysis, Sunstar Inc., 3-1 Asahi-machi, Takatsuki, Osaka 569-1195, Japan.
Shinji SakaneSafety & Analysis, Sunstar Inc., 3-1 Asahi-machi, Takatsuki, Osaka 569-1195, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The applicability domain's definition is important in validating the reliability of toxicity prediction models. However, applicability domains are established in various model formats and situations, and the definition method is still in the research stage. In this study, because predicting the correctness of a binary classifier means correctly identifying the target on which the binary classifier operates, we considered that the correctness prediction model itself functions as a threshold for the applicability domain of the binary classifier and used machine learning to develop

Indexed as

Integrated approach on testing and assessmentMachine learningNew approach methodologyQuantitative structure–activity relationshipRead-across concept

Identifiers

PMID42369409
PMCPMC13289031

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.