Skip to main content
. 2017 Sep 11;15(9):e04718. doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2017.4718

Table G.18.

Summary of dose–response analysis of incidence of vomiting/retching and retching in mink exposed to 3‐Ac‐DON reported by Wu et al. (2013a)

Models Number of parameters Minus Log‐likelihood p‐value AIC BMD10 BMDL10 Comment
(mg/kg bw per day)
Full model 5 5.04 na 20.08 na na
Null (reduced) model 1 20.19 na 42.18 na na
Probit 2 5.44 0.99 14.89 0.22 0.11 Selected
Logistic 2 5.51 0.97 15.03 0.23 0.12 Selected
LogProbit 2 5.41 1.00 14.83 0.22 0.11 Selected
LogLogistic 2 5.45 0.99 14.90 0.22 0.11 Selected
Multistage 2 Faileda na
Multistage Cancer 1 5.89 0.91 13.78 0.14 0.054 AIC minimum
Quantal‐Linear 1 8.08 0.25 18.15 0.045 0.027 Not selected
Weibull 2 5.41 1.00 14.62 0.21 0.081 Selected
Gamma Failed

The models selected to identify the lowest BMDL10 following EFSA guidance (EFSA Scientific Committee, 2017) are identified in the column ‘Comments’ and include the model with the lowest AIC.

AIC: area under the curve; BMD10: benchmark dose response of 10%; BMDL10: 95% lower confidence limit for the benchmark dose response (BMR) of 10%; bw: body weight; na: not available, including cases where the BMD/Ls were not calculated, the fit was incomplete, or serious or conflicting comments were noted (e.g. parameters reaching boundary)

a

The multistage model was considered as failed since the output, see Suppl. Information Mink gave for model fit a statistically impossible p‐value of 2 which was taken as an indication for problems of model fitting using BMDS (see also the graphic in Supplementary Information WUDON3Ac (Annex A).