Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21790312›Full record

ReviewJournal of toxicology and environmental health. Part B, Critical reviews2011

Neuroendocrine disruption: more than hormones are upset.

Andrew Waye, Vance L Trudeau

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of toxicology and environmental health. Part B, Critical reviews, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed
6.7field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

32 citing papers in PubMed, 130 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Prioritising research on endocrine disruption in the marine environment: a global perspective.Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2026
    Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. An Ethanolic Extract ofFrontiers in pharmacology · 2021
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. An ecotoxicological view on neurotoxicity assessment.Environmental sciences Europe · 2018
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Andrew WayeCentre for Advanced Research in Environmental Genomics, Department of Biology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Vance L Trudeau
University of Ottawa · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Only a small proportion of the published research on endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDC) directly examined effects on neuroendocrine processes. There is an expanding body of evidence that anthropogenic chemicals exert effects on neuroendocrine systems and that these changes might impact peripheral organ systems and physiological processes. Neuroendocrine disruption extends the concept of endocrine disruption to include the full breadth of integrative physiology (i.e., more than hormones are upset). Pollutants may also disrupt numerous other neurochemical pathways to affect an animal's capacity to reproduce, develop and grow, or deal with stress and other challenges. Several examples are presented in this review, from both vertebrates and invertebrates, illustrating that diverse environmental pollutants including pharmaceuticals, organochlorine pesticides, and industrial contaminants have the potential to disrupt neuroendocrine control mechanisms. While most investigations on EDC are carried out with vertebrate models, an attempt is also made to highlight the importance of research on invertebrate neuroendocrine disruption. The neurophysiology of many invertebrates is well described and many of their neurotransmitters are similar or identical to those in vertebrates; therefore, lessons learned from one group of organisms may help us understand potential adverse effects in others. This review argues for the adoption of systems biology and integrative physiology to address the effects of EDC. Effects of pulp and paper mill effluents on fish reproduction are a good example of where relatively narrow hypothesis testing strategies (e.g., whether or not pollutants are sex steroid mimics) have only partially solved a major problem in environmental biology. It is clear that a global, integrative physiological approach, including improved understanding of neuroendocrine control mechanisms, is warranted to fully understand the impacts of pulp and paper mill effluents. Neuroendocrine disruptors are defined as pollutants in the environment that are capable of acting as agonists/antagonists or modulators of the synthesis and/or metabolism of neuropeptides, neurotransmitters, or neurohormones, which subsequently alter diverse physiological, behavioral, or hormonal processes to affect an animal's capacity to reproduce, develop and grow, or deal with stress and other challenges. By adopting a definition of neuroendocrine disruption that encompasses both direct physiological targets and their indirect downstream effects, from the level of the individual to the ecosystem, a more comprehensive picture of the consequences of environmentally relevant EDC exposure may emerge.

Indexed as

AnimalsEndocrine DisruptorsEnvironmental ExposureEnvironmental PollutantsHumansInvertebratesModels, BiologicalNeurosecretory SystemsReproductionEndocrine DisruptorsEnvironmental Pollutants

Identifiers

PMID21790312
PMCPMC3173749
OpenAlexW2092394440

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.