↓ Skip to main content

Accelerating Adverse Outcome Pathway Development Using Publicly Available Data Sources

Overview of attention for article published in Current Environmental Health Reports, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
60 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
60 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
Title
Accelerating Adverse Outcome Pathway Development Using Publicly Available Data Sources
Published in
Current Environmental Health Reports, January 2016
DOI 10.1007/s40572-016-0079-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Noffisat O. Oki, Mark D. Nelms, Shannon M. Bell, Holly M. Mortensen, Stephen W. Edwards

Abstract

The adverse outcome pathway (AOP) concept links molecular perturbations with organism and population-level outcomes to support high-throughput toxicity (HTT) testing. International efforts are underway to define AOPs and store the information supporting these AOPs in a central knowledge base; however, this process is currently labor-intensive and time-consuming. Publicly available data sources provide a wealth of information that could be used to define computationally predicted AOPs (cpAOPs), which could serve as a basis for creating expert-derived AOPs in a much more efficient way. Computational tools for mining large datasets provide the means for extracting and organizing the information captured in these public data sources. Using cpAOPs as a starting point for expert-derived AOPs should accelerate AOP development. Coupling this with tools to coordinate and facilitate the expert development efforts will increase the number and quality of AOPs produced, which should play a key role in advancing the adoption of HTT testing, thereby reducing the use of animals in toxicity testing and greatly increasing the number of chemicals that can be tested.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Spain 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Unknown 57 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 30%
Researcher 13 22%
Other 5 8%
Student > Master 5 8%
Student > Bachelor 3 5%
Other 6 10%
Unknown 10 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 10%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 10%
Environmental Science 5 8%
Computer Science 4 7%
Other 11 18%
Unknown 18 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 17 February 2016.
All research outputs
#15,359,595
of 22,849,304 outputs
Outputs from Current Environmental Health Reports
#268
of 324 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#233,184
of 396,498 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Environmental Health Reports
#10
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,849,304 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 324 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.6. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% 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 396,498 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.