Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42471828›Full record

ArticleNAM journal2026

Semi-automated, evidence-based workflow for selection of reference chemicals for the validation of NAMs: a case study with the adipogenesis assay.

Hana C M Farnezi, Sander B I Lentz, Juliette Legler, Jorke H Kamstra

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in NAM journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Hana C M FarneziInstitute for Risk Assessment Sciences, Department of Population Health Sciences, Utrecht University. Yalelaan 104, 3508 TD, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Sander B I LentzInstitute for Risk Assessment Sciences, Department of Population Health Sciences, Utrecht University. Yalelaan 104, 3508 TD, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Juliette LeglerInstitute for Risk Assessment Sciences, Department of Population Health Sciences, Utrecht University. Yalelaan 104, 3508 TD, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Jorke H KamstraInstitute for Risk Assessment Sciences, Department of Population Health Sciences, Utrecht University. Yalelaan 104, 3508 TD, Utrecht, the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The validation of in vitro New Approach Methodologies (NAMs) requires the use of well-characterized reference chemicals to assess assay performance, reproducibility, and relevance. However, selecting such chemicals is often labor-intensive and lacks standardization. We developed a semi-automated, evidence-based workflow that integrates systematic literature review, AI-assisted data extraction, and quantitative evidence scoring to improve the efficiency and transparency of chemical selection. We conducted a structured EMBASE search, followed by AI-assisted abstract screening and data extraction, in a case study to select reference chemicals for the validation of an in vitro adipogenesis assay. Chemicals were evaluated for in vitro, in vivo, and human evidence of adipogenic or obesogenic effects. From 11,648 screened publications, 236 studies met the inclusion criteria, resulting in the identification of 243 candidate reference chemicals, of which 50 were prioritized based on scoring. The final selection encompassed a set of 22 chemicals with different levels of potency and diverse structures. This workflow illustrates how AI-assisted evidence synthesis can accelerate and standardize the selection of reference chemicals while maintaining expert oversight and ensuring regulatory relevance. It provides a reproducible and adaptable framework for future NAMs validation studies across diverse toxicological endpoints.

Indexed as

AdipogenesisArtificial intelligenceAssay validationChemical selectionLarge language models (LLMs)New approach methodologies (NAMs)Reference chemicals

Identifiers

PMID42471828
PMCPMC13380221

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.