分段结构方程模型与贝叶斯网络重新构建定量不良后果路径网络的比较。

IF 4.5 2区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL
Yang Cao, S Jannicke Moe, Riccardo De Bin, Knut Erik Tollefsen, You Song
{"title":"分段结构方程模型与贝叶斯网络重新构建定量不良后果路径网络的比较。","authors":"Yang Cao,&nbsp;S Jannicke Moe,&nbsp;Riccardo De Bin,&nbsp;Knut Erik Tollefsen,&nbsp;You Song","doi":"10.14573/altex.2207113","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Quantitative adverse outcome pathway network (qAOPN) is gaining momentum due to its predictive nature, alignment with quantitative risk assessment, and great potential as a computational new approach methodology (NAM) to reduce laboratory animal tests. The present work aimed to demonstrate two advanced modeling approaches, piecewise structural equation modeling (PSEM) and Bayesian network (BN), for de novo qAOPN model construction based on routine ecotoxicological data. A previously published AOP network comprised of four linear AOPs linking excessive reactive oxygen species production to mortality in aquatic organisms was employed as a case study. The demonstrative case study intended to answer: Which linear AOP in the network contributed the most to the AO? Can any of the upstream KEs accurately predict the AO? What are the advantages and limitations of PSEM or BN in qAOPN development? The outcomes from the two approaches showed that both PSEM and BN are suitable for constructing a complex qAOPN based on limited experimental data. Besides quantification of response-response relationships, both approaches could identify the most influencing linear AOP in a complex network and evaluate the predictive ability of the AOP, albeit some discrepancies in predictive ability were identified for the two approaches using this specific dataset. The advantages and limitations of the two approaches for qAOPN construction are discussed in detail, and suggestions on optimal workflows of PSEM and BN are provided to guide future qAOPN development.</p>","PeriodicalId":51231,"journal":{"name":"Altex-Alternatives To Animal Experimentation","volume":"40 2","pages":"287-298"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of piecewise structural equation modeling and Bayesian network for de novo construction of a quantitative adverse outcome pathway network.\",\"authors\":\"Yang Cao,&nbsp;S Jannicke Moe,&nbsp;Riccardo De Bin,&nbsp;Knut Erik Tollefsen,&nbsp;You Song\",\"doi\":\"10.14573/altex.2207113\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Quantitative adverse outcome pathway network (qAOPN) is gaining momentum due to its predictive nature, alignment with quantitative risk assessment, and great potential as a computational new approach methodology (NAM) to reduce laboratory animal tests. The present work aimed to demonstrate two advanced modeling approaches, piecewise structural equation modeling (PSEM) and Bayesian network (BN), for de novo qAOPN model construction based on routine ecotoxicological data. A previously published AOP network comprised of four linear AOPs linking excessive reactive oxygen species production to mortality in aquatic organisms was employed as a case study. The demonstrative case study intended to answer: Which linear AOP in the network contributed the most to the AO? Can any of the upstream KEs accurately predict the AO? What are the advantages and limitations of PSEM or BN in qAOPN development? The outcomes from the two approaches showed that both PSEM and BN are suitable for constructing a complex qAOPN based on limited experimental data. Besides quantification of response-response relationships, both approaches could identify the most influencing linear AOP in a complex network and evaluate the predictive ability of the AOP, albeit some discrepancies in predictive ability were identified for the two approaches using this specific dataset. The advantages and limitations of the two approaches for qAOPN construction are discussed in detail, and suggestions on optimal workflows of PSEM and BN are provided to guide future qAOPN development.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51231,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Altex-Alternatives To Animal Experimentation\",\"volume\":\"40 2\",\"pages\":\"287-298\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Altex-Alternatives To Animal Experimentation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14573/altex.2207113\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Altex-Alternatives To Animal Experimentation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14573/altex.2207113","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

定量不良后果通路网络(qAOPN)由于其预测性、与定量风险评估相一致以及作为一种减少实验动物试验的计算新方法(NAM)的巨大潜力而获得势头。本工作旨在展示两种先进的建模方法,即分段结构方程模型(PSEM)和贝叶斯网络(BN),用于基于常规生态毒理学数据的从头构建qAOPN模型。先前发表的AOP网络由四个线性AOP组成,将过量活性氧的产生与水生生物的死亡率联系起来,作为案例研究。演示性案例研究旨在回答:网络中哪个线性AOP对AO贡献最大?上游的ke能准确预测AO吗?在qAOPN发展中,PSEM或BN的优势和局限性是什么?两种方法的结果表明,基于有限的实验数据,PSEM和BN都适用于构建复杂的qAOPN。除了量化响应-响应关系之外,这两种方法都可以识别复杂网络中最具影响力的线性AOP并评估AOP的预测能力,尽管使用该特定数据集确定了两种方法在预测能力方面的一些差异。详细讨论了两种构建qAOPN的方法的优点和局限性,并提出了优化PSEM和BN工作流程的建议,以指导未来qAOPN的发展。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of piecewise structural equation modeling and Bayesian network for de novo construction of a quantitative adverse outcome pathway network.

Quantitative adverse outcome pathway network (qAOPN) is gaining momentum due to its predictive nature, alignment with quantitative risk assessment, and great potential as a computational new approach methodology (NAM) to reduce laboratory animal tests. The present work aimed to demonstrate two advanced modeling approaches, piecewise structural equation modeling (PSEM) and Bayesian network (BN), for de novo qAOPN model construction based on routine ecotoxicological data. A previously published AOP network comprised of four linear AOPs linking excessive reactive oxygen species production to mortality in aquatic organisms was employed as a case study. The demonstrative case study intended to answer: Which linear AOP in the network contributed the most to the AO? Can any of the upstream KEs accurately predict the AO? What are the advantages and limitations of PSEM or BN in qAOPN development? The outcomes from the two approaches showed that both PSEM and BN are suitable for constructing a complex qAOPN based on limited experimental data. Besides quantification of response-response relationships, both approaches could identify the most influencing linear AOP in a complex network and evaluate the predictive ability of the AOP, albeit some discrepancies in predictive ability were identified for the two approaches using this specific dataset. The advantages and limitations of the two approaches for qAOPN construction are discussed in detail, and suggestions on optimal workflows of PSEM and BN are provided to guide future qAOPN development.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Altex-Alternatives To Animal Experimentation
Altex-Alternatives To Animal Experimentation MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
7.70
自引率
8.90%
发文量
89
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: ALTEX publishes original articles, short communications, reviews, as well as news and comments and meeting reports. Manuscripts submitted to ALTEX are evaluated by two expert reviewers. The evaluation takes into account the scientific merit of a manuscript and its contribution to animal welfare and the 3R principle.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信