Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25405972›Full record

ReviewPhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2014

Medicines, shaken and stirred: a critical review on the ecotoxicology of pharmaceutical mixtures.

Thomas Backhaus

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

29 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Toxicological effect of acetaminophen, metamizole, and nimesulide cocktail on early development of zebrafish.Daru : journal of Faculty of Pharmacy, Tehran University of Medical Sciences · 2024
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Pharmaceutical pollution of the world's rivers.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  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

1 author.

Thomas BackhausDepartment of Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Gothenburg, Carl Skottsbergs Gata 22B, Box 461, 40530 Göteborg, Sweden thomas.backhaus@gu.se.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9643-1662

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Analytical monitoring surveys routinely confirm that organisms in the environment are exposed to complex multi-component pharmaceutical mixtures. We are hence tasked with the challenge to take this into consideration when investigating the ecotoxicology of pharmaceuticals. This review first provides a brief overview of the fundamental approaches for mixture toxicity assessment, which is then followed by a critical review on the empirical evidence that is currently at hand on the ecotoxicology of pharmaceutical mixtures. It is concluded that, while the classical concepts of concentration addition and independent action (response addition) provide a robust scientific footing, several knowledge gaps remain. This includes, in particular, the need for more and better empirical data on the effects of pharmaceutical mixtures on soil organisms as well as marine flora and fauna, and exploring the quantitative consequences of toxicokinetic, toxicodynamic and ecological interactions. Increased focus should be put on investigating the ecotoxicology of pharmaceutical mixtures in environmentally realistic settings.

Indexed as

EcotoxicologyAnimalsDrug CombinationsEnvironmental PollutantsPharmaceutical PreparationsDrug CombinationsEnvironmental PollutantsPharmaceutical Preparationsconcentration additionindependent actionmixture ecotoxicologysynergism

Identifiers

PMID25405972
PMCPMC4213595

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.