Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 541

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Metabonomics in Toxicology: A Review

Robertson, Donald G.·2005·Toxicological Sciences

Abstract

Metabonomics and its many pseudonyms (metabolomics, metabolic profiling, etc.) have exploded onto the scientific scene in the past 2 to 3 years. Nowhere has the impact been more profound than within the toxicology community. Within this community there exists a great deal of uncertainty about whether metabonomics is something to count on or just the most recent technological flash in the pan. Much of the uncertainty is due to unfamiliarity with analytical and chemometric facets of the technology and the attendant fear of any "black-box." With those fears in mind, metabonomics technology is reviewed with particular emphasis on toxicologic applications in preclinical drug development. The jargon, logistics, and applications of the technology are covered in some detail with emphasis on recent work in the field.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/toxsci/kfi102

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

See all 541

Metadata

Authors
Robertson, D. G.
Venue
Toxicological Sciences
Published
2005-02-02
Volume
85
Issue
2
Pages
809-822
ISSN
  • 1096-0929 (ISSN-L)
  • 1096-6080
OpenAlex
W2163617578
Cited by
541
References
0
FWCI
13.37
Type
journal article
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: Metabonomics in Toxicology: A Review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/toxsci/kfi102
The paper
Robertson, D. G. (2005). Metabonomics in Toxicology: A Review. Toxicological Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1093/toxsci/kfi102

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.