ReviewEnvironmental science and pollution research international2026
AI/ML-based computational models for toxicity prediction.
Review in Environmental science and pollution research international, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Advancing Drug Discovery with AI: Machine and Deep Learning Strategies for Target Identification and Precision Nanomedicine.International journal of nanomedicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The increasing demand for accurate toxicity assessment and to minimise or eliminate the use of animal testing has accelerated the development of numerous computational models, AI/ML models, and online resources that support research in computational toxicology. This review addresses toxicity prediction and chemical safety evaluation, focusing on computational models and data coverage, Molecular Descriptors, QSAR models, AI/ML-based approaches, Explainable AI, predictive methodologies, regulatory relevance, and accessibility. This collectively enables the identification, prediction, and analysis of chemical toxicity across various biological endpoints. In addition, the review highlights AI/ML tools for predicting toxicity endpoints, such as neurotoxicity, hepatotoxicity, cardiotoxicity, genotoxicity, and environmental toxicity. Regulatory limitations vary significantly among countries and jurisdictions, exhibiting a marked absence of convergence. Current debates regarding regulatory norms focus on achieving global conformity. Regulatory adaptability is the key as AI evolves rapidly. The promotion of AI/ML tool integration and interoperable frameworks could substantially enhance the future of predictive toxicology.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.