MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4320857614 · doi:10.1002/etc.5584

New Approach Methodologies for the Endocrine Activity Toolbox: Environmental Assessment for Fish and Amphibians

2023· review· en· W4320857614 on OpenAlexaff
Constance A. Mitchell, Natalie Burden, Mark Bonnell, Markus Hecker, Thomas H. Hutchinson, Magdalena M. Jagla, Carlie A. LaLone, Laurent Lagadic, Scott G. Lynn, Bryon Shore, You Song, Sara M.F. Vliet, James R. Wheeler, Michelle R. Embry

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Toxicology and Chemistry · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEffects and risks of endocrine disrupting chemicals
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersHealth and Environmental Sciences Institute
KeywordsAdverse Outcome PathwayTest strategyRisk analysis (engineering)Integration testingRisk assessmentGovernment (linguistics)Animal testingHazard analysisEndocrine systemComputer scienceBiologyBusinessComputational biologyEcologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multiple in vivo test guidelines focusing on the estrogen, androgen, thyroid, and steroidogenesis pathways have been developed and validated for mammals, amphibians, or fish. However, these tests are resource-intensive and often use a large number of laboratory animals. Developing alternatives for in vivo tests is consistent with the replacement, reduction, and refinement principles for animal welfare considerations, which are supported by increasing mandates to move toward an "animal-free" testing paradigm worldwide. New approach methodologies (NAMs) hold great promise to identify molecular, cellular, and tissue changes that can be used to predict effects reliably and more efficiently at the individual level (and potentially on populations) while reducing the number of animals used in (eco)toxicological testing for endocrine disruption. In a collaborative effort, experts from government, academia, and industry met in 2020 to discuss the current challenges of testing for endocrine activity assessment for fish and amphibians. Continuing this cross-sector initiative, our review focuses on the current state of the science regarding the use of NAMs to identify chemical-induced endocrine effects. The present study highlights the challenges of using NAMs for safety assessment and what work is needed to reduce their uncertainties and increase their acceptance in regulatory processes. We have reviewed the current NAMs available for endocrine activity assessment including in silico, in vitro, and eleutheroembryo models. New approach methodologies can be integrated as part of a weight-of-evidence approach for hazard or risk assessment using the adverse outcome pathway framework. The development and utilization of NAMs not only allows for replacement, reduction, and refinement of animal testing but can also provide robust and fit-for-purpose methods to identify chemicals acting via endocrine mechanisms. Environ Toxicol Chem 2023;42:757-777. © 2023 The Authors. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of SETAC.

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)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.095

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.345 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations25
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Toxicology and ChemistrySame topicEffects and risks of endocrine disrupting chemicalsFrench-language works237,207