The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
An evaluation of R2 as an inadequate measure for nonlinear models in pharmacological and biochemical research: a Monte Carlo approach
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: It is long known within the mathematical literature that the coefficient of determination R(2) is an inadequate measure for the goodness of fit in nonlinear models. Nevertheless, it is still frequently used within pharmacological and biochemical literature for the analysis and interpretation of nonlinear fitting to data. RESULTS: The intensive simulation approach undermines previous observations and emphasizes the extremely low performance of R(2) as a basis for model validity and performance when applied to pharmacological/biochemical nonlinear data. In fact, with the 'true' model having up to 500 times more strength of evidence based on Akaike weights, this was only reflected in the third to fifth decimal place of R(2). In addition, even the bias-corrected R(2)(adj) exhibited an extreme bias to higher parametrized models. The bias-corrected AICc and also BIC performed significantly better in this respect. CONCLUSION: Researchers and reviewers should be aware that R(2) is inappropriate when used for demonstrating the performance or validity of a certain nonlinear model. It should ideally be removed from scientific literature dealing with nonlinear model fitting or at least be supplemented with other methods such as AIC or BIC or used in context to other models in question.
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
A new look at the statistical model identification
Akaike, H. (1974) · IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control · doi:10.1109/tac.1974.1100705 · Cited by 51,879
Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretic approach.
Guthery, F. S., Burnham, K. P., & Anderson, D. R. (2003) · The Journal of Wildlife Management · doi:10.2307/3802723 · Cited by 41,495
A note on a general definition of the coefficient of determination
NAGELKERKE, N. J. D. (1991) · Biometrika · doi:10.1093/biomet/78.3.691 · Cited by 5,927
AIC model selection using Akaike weights
Wagenmakers, E.-J., & Farrell, S. (2004) · Psychonomic Bulletin & Review · doi:10.3758/bf03206482 · Cited by 2,684
Cited by
Burns, A. R., Stephens, W. Z., Stagaman, K., Wong, S., Rawls, J. F., Guillemin, K., & Bohannan, B. J. M. (2016) · The ISME Journal · doi:10.1038/ismej.2015.142 · Cited by 939
On validity, physical meaning, mechanism insights and regression of adsorption kinetic models
Vareda, J. P. (2023) · Journal of Molecular Liquids · doi:10.1016/j.molliq.2023.121416 · Cited by 380
SimpleTree —An Efficient Open Source Tool to Build Tree Models from TLS Clouds
Hackenberg, J., Spiecker, H., Calders, K., Disney, M., & Raumonen, P. (2015) · Forests · doi:10.3390/f6114245 · Cited by 367
Thymic involution and rising disease incidence with age
Palmer, S., Albergante, L., Blackburn, C. C., & Newman, T. J. (2018) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1714478115 · Cited by 364
A Miscanthus plantation can be carbon neutral without increasing soil carbon stocks
Robertson, A. D., Whitaker, J., Morrison, R., Davies, C. A., Smith, P., & McNamara, N. P. (2017) · GCB Bioenergy · doi:10.1111/gcbb.12397 · Cited by 52
Metadata
- Authors
- Spiess, A.-N., & Neumeyer, N.
- Venue
- BMC Pharmacology
- Published
- 2010-06-07
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 6-6
- ISSN
- 1471-2210 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1964903133
- Cited by
- 959
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 10.77
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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: An evaluation of R2 as an inadequate measure for nonlinear models in pharmacological and biochemical research: a Monte Carlo approach. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/1471-2210-10-6
- The paper
- Spiess, A.-N., & Neumeyer, N. (2010). An evaluation of R2 as an inadequate measure for nonlinear models in pharmacological and biochemical research: a Monte Carlo approach. BMC Pharmacology. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2210-10-6
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.