MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4290659587 · doi:10.1080/09553002.2022.2110300

Benchmark dose modeling of transcriptional data: a systematic approach to identify best practices for study designs used in radiation research

2022· article· en· W4290659587 on OpenAlexaff
R. Stainforth, Ngoc Q. Vuong, Nadine Adam, Byron Kuo, Ruth C. Wilkins, Carole L. Yauk, Afshin Beheshti, Vinita Chauhan

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Radiation Biology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEffects of Radiation Exposure
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaHealth Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBenchmark (surveying)Selection (genetic algorithm)Range (aeronautics)Computational biologyStatisticsToxicologyBioinformaticsBiologyMedicineComputer scienceMathematicsArtificial intelligenceMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Benchmark dose (BMD) modeling is a method commonly used in chemical toxicology to identify the point of departure (POD) from a dose-response curve linked to a health-related outcome. Recently, its application in the analysis of transcriptional data for quantitative adverse outcome pathway (AOP) development is being explored. As AOPs are informed by diverse data types, it is important to understand the impact of study parameters such as dose selection, the number of replicates and dose range on BMD outputs for radiation-induced genes and pathways. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Cs gamma-radiation at 0, 1, 2, 3, 4.5, 6, 8 and 10.5 Gy. The dataset comprised a broad dose range over multiple dose points with consistent dose spacing and multiple biological replicates. This dataset was ideal for systematically transforming across three categories: (1) dose range, (2) dose-spacing and (3) number of controls/replicates. Across these categories, 29 transformed datasets were compared to the original dataset to determine the impact of each transformation on the BMD outputs. RESULTS: Most of the experimental changes did not impact the BMD outputs. The transformed datasets were largely consistent with the original dataset in terms of the number of reproduced genes modeled and absolute BMD values for genes and pathways. Variations in dose selection identified the importance of the absolute value of the lowest and second dose. It was determined that dose selection should include at least two doses <1 Gy and two >5 Gy to achieve meaningful BMD outputs. Changes to the number of biological replicates in the control and non-zero dose groups impacted the overall accuracy and precision of the BMD outputs as well as the ability to fit dose-response models consistent with the original dataset. CONCLUSION: Successful application of transcriptomic BMD modeling for radiation datasets requires considerations of the exposure dose and the number of biological replicates. Most important is the selection of the lowest doses and dose spacing. Reflections on these parameters in experimental design will provide meaningful BMD outputs that could correlate well to apical endpoints of relevance to radiation exposure assessment.

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)0.267
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.454
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.733
Threshold uncertainty score0.904

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.2670.454
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.008
Bibliometrics0.0080.007
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0060.006
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.362
GPT teacher head0.522
Teacher spread0.160 · 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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designSimulation or modeling
DomainMethods
GenreMethods

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

Citations10
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Radiation BiologySame topicEffects of Radiation ExposureFrench-language works237,207