Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 752

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Defining hormesis

Calabrese, E J, Baldwin, L A·2002·Human & Experimental Toxicology

Abstract

Much confusion surrounds the concept of hormesis and what its biological meaning represents. This paper provides a definition of hormesis that addresses its historical foundations, quantitative features, and under-lying evolutionary and toxicologically based mechanistic strategies. Hormesis should be considered an adaptive response characterized by biphasic dose responses of generally similar quantitative features with respect to amplitude and range of the stimulatory response that are either directly induced or the result of compensatory biological processes following an initial disruption in homeostasis. Given the limited magnitude of the stimulatory response (i.e., usually 30–60% greater than controls at maximum), heightened study design and replication requirements are often necessary to ensure reliable judgments on causality. Even though hormesis is considered an adaptive response, the issue of beneficial/harmful effects should not be part of the definition of hormesis, but reserved to a subsequent evaluation of the biological and ecological context of the response.

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 · 10.1191/0960327102ht217oa

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 752

Metadata

Authors
Calabrese, E. J., & Baldwin, L. A.
Venue
Human & Experimental Toxicology
Published
2002-02
Volume
21
Issue
2
Pages
91-97
ISSN
  • 0960-3271 (ISSN-L)
  • 1477-0903
OpenAlex
W4229633773
Cited by
752
References
0
FWCI
8.58
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: Defining hormesis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1191/0960327102ht217oa
The paper
Calabrese, E. J., & Baldwin, L. A. (2002). Defining hormesis. Human & Experimental Toxicology. https://doi.org/10.1191/0960327102ht217oa

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.