ArticleGerman medical science : GMS e-journal2015
Risks, risk assessment and risk competence in toxicology.
Article in German medical science : GMS e-journal, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Toxicity of plant extracts containing pyrrolizidine alkaloids using alternative invertebrate models.Molecular medicine reports · 2018Article
- Self-criticism of physicians, patient participation and risk competence.German medical science : GMS e-journal · 2015Article
- Increasing the risk competence of patients: an interdisciplinary task.German medical science : GMS e-journal · 2015Article
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
Understanding the toxic effects of xenobiotics requires sound knowledge of physiology and biochemistry. The often described lack of understanding pharmacology/toxicology is therefore primarily caused by the general absence of the necessary fundamental knowledge. Since toxic effects depend on exposure (or dosage) assessing the risks arising from toxic substances also requires quantitative reasoning. Typically public discussions nearly always neglect quantitative aspects and laypersons tend to disregard dose-effect-relationships. One of the main reasons for such disregard is the fact that exposures often occur at extremely low concentrations that can only be perceived intellectually but not by the human senses. However, thresholds in the low exposure range are often scientifically disputed. At the same time, ignorance towards known dangers is wide-spread. Thus, enhancing the risk competence of laypersons will have to be initially restricted to increasing the awareness of existing problems.
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.