ArticleTransgenic research2014
Protection goals in environmental risk assessment: a practical approach.
Article in Transgenic research, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
31 citing papers in PubMed.
- Complexity Meets Risk-The Next Generation of Genome-Edited Plants Challenges Established Concepts for Environmental Risk Assessment in the EU.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Genetically modified microorganisms for agricultural use: an opportunity for the advancement of risk assessment criteria in Argentina.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Article
- Paraguay's approach to biotechnology governance: a comprehensive guide.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024Article
- GEnZ explorer: a tool for visualizing agroclimate to inform research and regulatory risk assessment.Transgenic research · 2023Article
- Recommendations for environmental risk assessment of gene drive applications for malaria vector control.Malaria journal · 2022Article
- Regulatory frameworks can facilitate or hinder the potential for genome editing to contribute to sustainable agricultural development.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2022Article
- Article
- Adequacy and sufficiency evaluation of existing EFSA guidelines for the molecular characterisation, environmental risk assessment and post-market environmental monitoring of genetically modified insects containing engineered gene drives.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2020Article
- Paraguay's Path Toward the Simplification of Procedures in the Approval of GE Crops.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2020Article
- Genetic Biocontrol for Invasive Species.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2020Review
- Sublethal Endpoints in Non-target Organism Testing for Insect-Active GE Crops.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2020Review
- Problem formulation and phenotypic characterisation for the development of novel crops.Transgenic research · 2019Article
- Using problem formulation for fit-for-purpose pre-market environmental risk assessments of regulated stressors.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2019Article
- Conducting fit-for-purpose food safety risk assessments.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2019Article
- Applying ecosystem services for pre-market environmental risk assessments of regulated stressors.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2019Article
- Using problem formulation to clarify the meaning of weight of evidence and biological relevance in environmental risk assessments for genetically modified crops.GM crops & food · 2019Article
- Article
- The Integration of Science and Policy in Regulatory Decision-Making: Observations on Scientific Expert Panels Deliberating GM Crops in Centers of Diversity.Frontiers in plant science · 2018Article
- Capacities for the Risk Assessment of GMOs: Challenges to Build Sustainable Systems.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2018Article
- Variation among conventional cultivars could be used as a criterion for environmental safety assessment of Bt rice on nontarget arthropods.Scientific reports · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Policy protection goals are set up in most countries to minimise harm to the environment, humans and animals caused by human activities. Decisions on whether to approve new agricultural products, like pesticides or genetically modified (GM) crops, take into account these policy protection goals. To support decision-making, applications for approval of commercial uses of GM crops usually comprise an environmental risk assessment (ERA). These risk assessments are analytical tools, based on science, that follow a conceptual model that includes a problem formulation step where policy protection goals are considered. However, in most countries, risk assessors face major problems in that policy protection goals set in the legislation are stated in very broad terms and are too ambiguous to be directly applicable in ERAs. This means that risk assessors often have to interpret policy protection goals without clear guidance on what effects would be considered harmful. In this paper we propose a practical approach that may help risk assessors to translate policy protection goals into unambiguous (i.e., operational) protection goals and to establish relevant assessment endpoints and risk hypotheses that can be used in ERAs. Examples are provided to show how this approach can be applied to two areas of environmental concern relevant to the ERAs of GM crops.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24154954What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.