ArticleMolecular diversity2026
Deep learning-enhanced QSAR modeling for predicting developmental neurotoxicity based on molecular initiating events from adverse outcome pathways.
Article in Molecular diversity, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Developmental neurotoxicity (DNT) is linked to chemical exposure that disrupts the nervous system in humans or animals. Traditional methods for assessing chemical toxicity are valuable but often time-consuming, costly, and involve significant animal use, making it impractical to meet growing demands. To address this, we developed a deep learning-enhanced QSAR modeling framework aimed at predicting binding affinities towards molecular initiating events (MIEs) and key events (KEs) within the Adverse Outcome Pathway (AOP) relevant to exposure to pesticide-contaminated cannabis. Our model was trained on data from 24,476 compounds, sourced from the ChEMBL database, and tested against 4 MIE and 6 KE tasks. The DNNs showed superior performance, with an average correlation coefficient of 0.82 ± 0.05 and a root mean square error of 0.72 ± 0.08 for the test set. To enhance interpretability, we used SHAP values to explain the model's predictions clearly. Furthermore, ECFP4 feature contributions were mapped onto known neurotoxic compounds to highlight regions likely responsible for MIEs visually. Our results confirm that developed models accurately predict DNT and effectively identify the correct MIEs and KEs for several neurotoxicants.
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.