Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27044369›Full record

ArticleThe AAPS journal2016

Environmental Risk Assessment of Pharmaceutical Mixtures: Demands, Gaps, and Possible Bridges.

Thomas Backhaus

Abstract readComment
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The AAPS journal, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Is ionizing radiation effective in removing pharmaceuticals from wastewater?Environmental science and pollution research international · 2021
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

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, Goteborg, Sweden. thomas.backhaus@gu.se.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The ecotoxicological risk of pharmaceutical mixtures typically exceeds the risk of each individual compound, which calls specific attention to the fact that monitoring surveys routinely find complex pharmaceutical mixtures in various environmental compartments. However, although the body of evidence on the ecotoxicology of pharmaceutical mixtures is quite consistent, the current guidelines for the environmental risk assessment of pharmaceuticals often do not explicitly address mixture effects. Data availability and acceptable methods often limit such assessments. A tiered approach that begins with summing up individual risk quotients, i.e., the ratio between the predicted or measured environmental concentration and the predicted no effect concentration (PNEC) is therefore suggested in this paper, in order to improve the realism of the environmental risk assessment of pharmaceuticals. Additionally, the use of a mixture-specific assessment factor, as well as the classical mixture toxicity concepts of concentration addition and independent action is explored. Finally, specific attention is given to the exposure-based waiving of environmental risk assessments, as currently implemented in screening or pre-screening phases (tier 0 in Europe, categorical exclusion in the USA), since even low, individually non-toxic concentrations might combine to produce substantial mixture effects.

Indexed as

EcotoxicologyRisk AssessmentEnvironmentEnvironmental MonitoringEuropeWater Pollutants, ChemicalWater Pollutants, Chemicalconcentration additionenvironmental risk assessmentindependent actionmixture assessment factormixture risk assessment

Identifiers

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.