Adverse outcome pathways: Application to enhance mechanistic understanding of neurotoxicity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent developments have prompted the transition of empirically based testing of late stage toxicity in animals for a range of different endpoints including neurotoxicity to more efficient and predictive mechanistically based approaches with greater emphasis on measurable key events early in the progression of disease. The adverse outcome pathway (AOP) has been proposed as a simplified organizational construct to contribute to this transition by linking molecular initiating events and earlier (more predictive) key events at lower levels of biological organization to disease outcomes. As such, AOPs are anticipated to facilitate the compilation of information to increase mechanistic understanding of pathophysiological pathways that are responsible for human disease. In this review, the sequence of key events resulting in adverse outcome (AO) defined as parkinsonian motor impairment and learning and memory deficit in children, triggered by exposure to environmental chemicals has been briefly described using the AOP framework. These AOPs follow convention adopted in an Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) AOP development program, publically available, to permit tailored application of AOPs for a range of different purposes. Due to the complexity of disease pathways, including neurodegenerative disorders, a specific symptom of the disease (e.g. parkinsonian motor deficit) is considered as the AO in a developed AOP. Though the description is necessarily limited by the extent of current knowledge, additional characterization of involved pathways through description of related AOPs interlinked into networks for the same disease has potential to contribute to more holistic and mechanistic understanding of the pathophysiological pathways involved, possibly leading to the mechanism-based reclassification of diseases, thus facilitating more personalized treatment.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".