The DOI matches its Crossref record; 48 of the 48 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Validation of in-vitro bioassay methods: Application in herbal drug research
Abstract
This present review described the validation method of in-vitro bioassay for its application in herbal drug research. Seven sequencing steps that can be taken for performing a valid bioassay include: literature survey, sample stability evaluation, Biosystem performance testing, Sample performance evaluation, determination of 50% effective concentration or cytotoxic concentrations, selective index evaluation, and determination of accurate relative potency of sample. Detailed methods and acceptance criteria for each step are described herein. Method calculations of the relative potency of sample using European Pharmacopeia 10.0, 5.3 (2020) were recommended instead of using United States Pharmacopeia 42 (2019). For having reliable data and conclusions, all methods (chemical and bioassay) need to be first validated before any data collection. Absence of any validation method may results in incorrect conclusions and bias.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Zhang, J.-H., Chung, T. D. Y., & Oldenburg, K. R. (1999) · SLAS Discovery · doi:10.1177/108705719900400206 · Cited by 6,847
Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing
Weinstein, M. P., & Clinical (2019) · Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute eBooks · Cited by 4,341
Anti-infective potential of natural products: How to develop a stronger in vitro ‘proof-of-concept’
Cos, P., Vlietinck, A. J., Berghe, D. V., & Maes, L. (2006) · Journal of Ethnopharmacology · doi:10.1016/j.jep.2006.04.003 · Cited by 1,603
Gene-Wide Analysis Detects Two New Susceptibility Genes for Alzheimer's Disease
Escott-Price, V., Bellenguez, C., Wang, L.-S., Choi, S.-H., Harold, D., Jones, L., Holmans, P., Gerrish, A., Vedernikov, A., Richards, A., et al. (2014) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0094661 · Cited by 1,398
Guidelines for accurate EC50/IC50 estimation
Sebaugh, J. L. (2011) · Pharmaceutical Statistics · doi:10.1002/pst.426 · Cited by 946
Pan, S.-Y., Zhou, S.-F., Gao, S.-H., Yu, Z.-L., Zhang, S.-F., Tang, M.-K., Sun, J.-N., Ma, D.-L., Han, Y.-F., Fong, W.-F., et al. (2013) · Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine · doi:10.1155/2013/627375 · Cited by 687
Riss, T., Moravec, R. A., Niles, A. L., Duellman, S. J., Benink, H. A., Worzella, T. J., & Minor, L. K. (2016) · Europe PMC (PubMed Central) · Cited by 469
EC50 estimation of antioxidant activity in DPPH assay using several statistical programs
Chen, Z., Bertin, R., & Froldi, G. (2013) · Food Chemistry · doi:10.1016/j.foodchem.2012.11.001 · Cited by 466
General Cytotoxicity Assessment by Means of the MTT Assay
Tolosa, L., Donato, M. T., & Gómez-Lechón, M. J. (2014) · Methods in molecular biology · doi:10.1007/978-1-4939-2074-7_26 · Cited by 390
Batista, R., De Jesus Silva Júnior, A., & De Oliveira, A. B. (2009) · Molecules · doi:10.3390/molecules14083037 · Cited by 304
Cited by
Samakkarnthai, P., Saul, D., Zhang, L., Aversa, Z., Doolittle, M. L., Sfeir, J. G., Kaur, J., Atkinson, E. J., Edwards, J. R., Russell, G. G., et al. (2023) · Aging · doi:10.18632/aging.204701 · Cited by 34
(2022) · PubMed Central · Cited by 17
Metadata
- Venue
- Profiles of Drug Substances, Excipients and Related Methodology
- Publisher
- Elsevier
- Published
- 2021
- Volume
- 46
- Pages
- 273-307
- ISSN
- 1871-5125 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3081667723
- Cited by
- 482
- References
- 48
- FWCI
- 102.84
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Validation of in-vitro bioassay methods: Application in herbal drug research. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/bs.podrm.2020.07.005
- The paper
- Validation of in-vitro bioassay methods: Application in herbal drug research. (2021). Profiles of Drug Substances, Excipients and Related Methodology. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.podrm.2020.07.005
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
