MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4245057248 · doi:10.1002/9780470744307.gat007

Toxicokinetics

2009· other· en· W4245057248 on OpenAlexaff
Ashley Roberts, A.G. Renwick

Bibliographic record

VenueGeneral, Applied and Systems Toxicology · 2009
Typeother
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCarcinogens and Genotoxicity Assessment
Canadian institutionsCantox Health Sciences International
Fundersnot available
KeywordsToxicokineticsMetabolic clearance rateDistribution (mathematics)ChemistryBiochemical engineeringPharmacokineticsPharmacologyMathematicsBiologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Toxicokinetics is essentially the study of the kinetics, or movement, of a toxic chemical into and around the body as well as its fate within the body. Thus, there are four basic processes involved in toxicokinetics: absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion, all of which are characterized descriptively and mathematically in terms of rate and extent. Toxicokinetics represents an important part of the safety evaluation of chemicals, but because the subject is perceived as being mathematically based it tends to be regarded as difficult and rather unapproachable by biologists. This chapter relates the underlying physiological and biochemical processes to the basic pharmacokinetic parameters and constants. This is followed by a consideration of the types of experimental data that are needed in order to determine the various parameters. The chapter concludes with a consideration of specific aspects related to the interpretation of high‐dose, chronic animal studies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.089

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0270.013

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeneral, Applied and Systems ToxicologySame topicCarcinogens and Genotoxicity AssessmentFrench-language works237,207