ArticleEnvironmental health perspectives2016
Evidence from Toxicology: The Most Essential Science for Prevention.
Article in Environmental health perspectives, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Assessor burden, inter-rater agreement and user experience of the RoB-SPEO tool for assessing risk of bias in studies estimating prevalence of exposure to occupational risk factors: An analysis from the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates of the Work-related Burden of Disease and Injury.Environment international · 2022Pooled it
- Article
- Essence of toxicology research to Saudi Arabia Vision 2030 and beyond: Current state and future perspectives.Saudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society · 2026Article
- Socio-demographic and toxicological findings from autoptic cases in a Northern Italy community (2017-2022).International journal of legal medicine · 2025Article
- Conducting evaluations of evidence that are transparent, timely and can lead to health-protective actions.Environmental health : a global access science source · 2022Article
- Assessing the quality of evidence in studies estimating prevalence of exposure to occupational risk factors: The QoE-SPEO approach applied in the systematic reviews from the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates of the Work-related burden of disease and Injury.Environment international · 2022Article
- Mixture toxicity, cumulative risk, and environmental justice in United States federal policy, 1980-2016 : Why, with much known, was little done?Environmental health : a global access science source · 2021Article
- Commentary: Novel strategies and new tools to curtail the health effects of pesticides.Environmental health : a global access science source · 2021Article
- Reviews in environmental health: How systematic are they?Environment international · 2021Article
- RoB-SPEO: A tool for assessing risk of bias in studies estimating the prevalence of exposure to occupational risk factors from the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates of the Work-related Burden of Disease and Injury.Environment international · 2020Article
- Environmental Chemicals and Autism: A Scoping Review of the Human and Animal Research.Environmental health perspectives · 2019Article
- WHO/ILO work-related burden of disease and injury: Protocol for systematic reviews of exposure to occupational ergonomic risk factors and of the effect of exposure to occupational ergonomic risk factors on osteoarthritis of hip or knee and selected other musculoskeletal diseases.Environment international · 2019Article
- Weight of Evidence for Hazard Identification: A Critical Review of the Literature.Environmental health perspectives · 2018Review
- Article
- An Integrated Experimental Design for the Assessment of Multiple Toxicological End Points in Rat Bioassays.Environmental health perspectives · 2017Article
- Use of a modified GreenScreen tool to conduct a screening-level comparative hazard assessment of conventional silver and two forms of nanosilver.Environmental health : a global access science source · 2016Article
- Preconception Care: A New Standard of Care within Maternal Health Services.BioMed research international · 2016Review
- GRADE: Assessing the quality of evidence in environmental and occupational health.Environment internationalArticle
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
backgroundThe most essential goal of medicine and public health is to prevent harm (primum non nocere). This goal is only fully achieved with primary prevention, which requires us to identify and prevent harms prior to human exposure through research and testing that does not involve human subjects. For that reason, public health policies place considerable reliance on nonhuman toxicological studies. However, toxicology as a field has often not produced efficient and timely evidence for decision making in public health. In response to this, the U.S. National Research Council called for the adoption of evidence-based methods and systematic reviews in regulatory decision making. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the European Food Safety Agency (EFSA) have recently endorsed these methods in their assessments of safety and risk.
objectivesIn this commentary we summarize challenges and problems in current practices in toxicology as applied to decision making. We compare these practices with the principles and methods utilized in evidence-based medicine and health care, with emphasis on the record of the Cochrane Collaboration. DISCUSSION: We propose a stepwise strategy to support the development, validation, and application of evidence-based toxicology (EBT). We discuss current progresses in this field produced by the Office of Health Assessment and Translation (OHAT) of the National Toxicology Program and the Navigation Guide works. We propose that adherence to the Cochrane principles is a fundamental prerequisite for the development and implementation of EBT.
conclusionThe adoption of evidence-based principles and methods will enhance the validity, transparency, efficiency, and acceptance of toxicological evidence, with benefits in terms of reducing delays and costs for all stakeholders (researchers, consumers, regulators, and industry). CITATION: Mandrioli D, Silbergeld EK. 2016. Evidence from toxicology: the most essential science for prevention. Environ Health Perspect 124:6-11; http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1509880.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.