| Title |
The future trajectory of adverse outcome pathways: a commentary
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Archives of Toxicology, March 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00204-018-2183-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Fiona Sewell, Nichola Gellatly, Maria Beaumont, Natalie Burden, Richard Currie, Lolke de Haan, Thomas H. Hutchinson, Miriam Jacobs, Catherine Mahony, Ian Malcomber, Jyotigna Mehta, Graham Whale, Ian Kimber |
| Abstract |
The advent of adverse outcome pathways (AOPs) has provided a new lexicon for description of mechanistic toxicology, and a renewed enthusiasm for exploring modes of action resulting in adverse health and environmental effects. In addition, AOPs have been used successfully as a framework for the design and development of non-animal approaches to toxicity testing. Although the value of AOPs is widely recognised, there remain challenges and opportunities associated with their use in practise. The purpose of this article is to consider specifically how the future trajectory of AOPs may provide a basis for addressing some of those challenges and opportunities. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Italy | 1 | 25% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 25% |
| Mauritius | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 52 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 12 | 23% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 21% |
| Other | 8 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 13 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 8 | 15% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 12% |
| Chemistry | 5 | 10% |
| Environmental Science | 4 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 8 | 15% |
| Unknown | 17 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 May 2018.
All research outputs
#7,553,524
of 23,041,514 outputs
Outputs from Archives of Toxicology
#967
of 2,653 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#133,414
of 333,155 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Archives of Toxicology
#9
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,041,514 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,653 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 333,155 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.