Cited by 184Scientific Computing and Data ManagementData Visualization and AnalyticsBioinformatics and Genomic Networks

ToxPi Graphical User Interface 2.0: Dynamic exploration, visualization, and sharing of integrated data models

Open access
Marvel, Skylar W., To, Kimberly, Grimm, Fabian A., Wright, Fred A., Rusyn, Ivan, Reif, David M.·2018·BMC Bioinformatics

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Drawing integrated conclusions from diverse source data requires synthesis across multiple types of information. The ToxPi (Toxicological Prioritization Index) is an analytical framework that was developed to enable integration of multiple sources of evidence by transforming data into integrated, visual profiles. Methodological improvements have advanced ToxPi and expanded its applicability, necessitating a new, consolidated software platform to provide functionality, while preserving flexibility for future updates. RESULTS: We detail the implementation of a new graphical user interface for ToxPi (Toxicological Prioritization Index) that provides interactive visualization, analysis, reporting, and portability. The interface is deployed as a stand-alone, platform-independent Java application, with a modular design to accommodate inclusion of future analytics. The new ToxPi interface introduces several features, from flexible data import formats (including legacy formats that permit backward compatibility) to similarity-based clustering to options for high-resolution graphical output. CONCLUSIONS: We present the new ToxPi interface for dynamic exploration, visualization, and sharing of integrated data models. The ToxPi interface is freely-available as a single compressed download that includes the main Java executable, all libraries, example data files, and a complete user manual from http://toxpi.org .

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 · 10.1186/s12859-018-2089-2

Cites

12 of 12 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. [1]Tufte ER The visual display of quantitative information 2001 Cheshire Graphics Press
  2. [8]National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and medicine Using 21st Century Science to Improve Risk-Related Evaluations 2017 Washington The National Academies Press 28267305
  3. [9]National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and medicine Application of Modern Toxicology Approaches for Predicting Acute Toxicity for Chemical Defense 2015 Washington The National Academies Press 26468569
  4. [10]National Research Council A framework to guide selection of chemical alternatives 2014 Washington The national academies press 25473704
  5. [12]Guyton KZ Loomis D Grosse Y El Ghissassi F Benbrahim-Tallaa L Guha N Scoccianti C Mattock H Straif K International Agency for Research on Cancer monograph working group, IARC, Lyon, France. Carcinogenicity of tetrachlorvinphos, parathion, malathion, diazinon, and glyphosate Lancet Oncol 2015 16 5 490 491 10.1016/S1470-2045(15)70134-8 25801782 · DOI
  6. [13]Loomis D Guyton K Grosse Y El Ghissasi F Bouvard V Benbrahim-Tallaa L Guha N Mattock H Straif K International Agency for Research on Cancer monograph working group, IARC, Lyon, France. Carcinogenicity of lindane, DDT, and 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid Lancet Oncol 2015 16 8 891 892 10.1016/S1470-2045(15)00081-9 26111929 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Marvel, S. W., To, K., Grimm, F. A., Wright, F. A., Rusyn, I., & Reif, D. M.
Affiliations
  • North Carolina State University (US)
  • Texas A&M University (US)
Corresponding author
Reif, David M.
Venue
BMC Bioinformatics
Published
2018-03-05
Volume
19
Issue
1
Pages
80-80
ISSN
1471-2105 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2795219670
Cited by
184
References
12
Citations by year
2026: 27 · 2025: 30 · 2024: 36 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 6
FWCI
19.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • BMC Bioinformatics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (RD83516608, RD83580201)
  • National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (ES027704, ES025128, ES007329)
  • Society of Toxicology (Syngenta Fellowship Award)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Scientific Computing and Data Management
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Data Visualization and Analytics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Bioinformatics and Genomic Networks
Keywords
ToxPi, graphical user interface, interactive visualization, similarity-based clustering, Java programs, backward compatibility, toxicological profile, software platform
MeSH terms
Models, Theoretical, Software, User-Computer Interface, Cluster Analysis, Information Storage and Retrieval, Information Dissemination

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