PK-DB: pharmacokinetics database for individualized and stratified computational modeling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A multitude of pharmacokinetics studies have been published. However, due to the lack of an open database, pharmacokinetics data, as well as the corresponding meta-information, have been difficult to access. We present PK-DB (https://pk-db.com), an open database for pharmacokinetics information from clinical trials. PK-DB provides curated information on (i) characteristics of studied patient cohorts and subjects (e.g. age, bodyweight, smoking status, genetic variants); (ii) applied interventions (e.g. dosing, substance, route of application); (iii) pharmacokinetic parameters (e.g. clearance, half-life, area under the curve) and (iv) measured pharmacokinetic time-courses. Key features are the representation of experimental errors, the normalization of measurement units, annotation of information to biological ontologies, calculation of pharmacokinetic parameters from concentration-time profiles, a workflow for collaborative data curation, strong validation rules on the data, computational access via a REST API as well as human access via a web interface. PK-DB enables meta-analysis based on data from multiple studies and data integration with computational models. A special focus lies on meta-data relevant for individualized and stratified computational modeling with methods like physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK), pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD), or population pharmacokinetic (pop PK) modeling.
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 | 0.006 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.045 | 0.025 |
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".