MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2030725327 · doi:10.1080/10937404.2010.483933

The Future of Toxicity Testing

2010· review· en· W2030725327 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Toxicology and Environmental Health Part B · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicAnimal testing and alternatives
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStakeholderToxicityHuman healthRisk assessmentAnimal testingAdverse Outcome PathwayRisk analysis (engineering)Computer scienceComputational biologyBiologyMedicineEnvironmental healthPolitical scienceEcologyComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2007, the U.S. National Research Council (NRC) released a report, "Toxicity Testing in the 21st Century: A Vision and a Strategy," that proposes a paradigm shift for toxicity testing of environmental agents. The vision is based on the notion that exposure to environmental agents leads to adverse health outcomes through the perturbation of toxicity pathways that are operative in humans. Implementation of the NRC vision will involve a fundamental change in the assessment of toxicity of environmental agents, moving away from adverse health outcomes observed in experimental animals to the identification of critical perturbations of toxicity pathways. Pathway perturbations will be identified using in vitro assays and quantified for dose response using methods in computational toxicology and other recent scientific advances in basic biology. Implementation of the NRC vision will require a major research effort, not unlike that required to successfully map the human genome, extending over 10 to 20 years, involving the broad scientific community to map important toxicity pathways operative in humans. This article provides an overview of the scientific tools and technologies that will form the core of the NRC vision for toxicity testing. Of particular importance will be the development of rapidly performed in vitro screening assays using human cells and cell lines or human tissue surrogates to efficiently identify environmental agents producing critical pathway perturbations. In addition to the overview of the NRC vision, this study documents the reaction by a number of stakeholder groups since 2007, including the scientific, risk assessment, regulatory, and animal welfare communities.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.998
Threshold uncertainty score0.537

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.191
GPT teacher head0.436
Teacher spread0.244 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it