ArticleArchives of toxicology2017
Scientific principles for the identification of endocrine-disrupting chemicals: a consensus statement.
Article in Archives of toxicology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 56 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
56 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Impact of Bisphenol A on Thyroid Function in Neonates and Children: A Systematic Review of the Literature.Nutrients · 2021Pooled it
- Screening of Estrogenic and Antiestrogenic Effects of Estradiol, Bisphenol A, and Fulvestrant Using 2D and 3D Breast Cancer Cell Systems With a Luciferase Reporter Gene Assay.Journal of applied toxicology : JAT · 2026Article
- A Dual Cell-Line Molecular Platform to Assess Sub-Threshold Biocompatibility: Application to Processed Orthodontic Clears Aligners.Orthodontics & craniofacial research · 2026Article
- Metabolic Disruption and Steatosis Induced by Drinking Water Disinfection Byproducts in HepG2 and HUH7 Cells.Toxics · 2026Article
- Regulation of chemicals demands assessment of risks rather than identification of hazards only.Archives of toxicology · 2026Article
- New approach methodologies (NAMs) for improved developmental and reproductive toxicity (DART) assessment with focus on endocrine disruption - a PARC project.Frontiers in toxicology · 2026Review
- Scientific and Regulatory Perspectives on Chemical Risk Assessment of Pesticides in the European Union.Journal of xenobiotics · 2025Review
- Endometriosis-like lesions induced by phthalates: new phytotherapic applications to complement traditional cares: a PNRR 2023 project.BMC complementary medicine and therapies · 2025Article
- Plant Polyphenols as Heart's Best Friends: From Health Properties, to Cellular Effects, to Molecular Mechanisms of Action.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Evaluation of estrogenic and anti-estrogenic activity of endocrine disruptors using breast cancer spheroids: a comparative study of T47D and MCF7 cell lines in 2D and 3D models.Frontiers in toxicology · 2025Article
- Liquid chromatography-high-resolution mass spectrometry-based metabolomics revealing the effects of zearalenone and alpha-zearalenol on human endometrial cancer cells.Toxicology research · 2024Article
- Thresholds of adversity for endocrine disrupting substances: a conceptual case study.Archives of toxicology · 2024Article
- Prenatal and perinatal exposure to Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS)-contaminated drinking water impacts offspring neurobehavior and development.The Science of the total environment · 2024Article
- Guidelines on Developmental Toxicity Tests: Brief Insights.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2024Article
- Exposure to endocrine disrupting chemicals impacts immunological and metabolic status of women during pregnancy.Molecular and cellular endocrinology · 2023Article
- The regulation of endocrine-disrupting chemicals to minimize their impact on health.Nature reviews. Endocrinology · 2023Review
- Endocrine-Disrupting Chemicals: Science and Policy.Policy insights from the behavioral and brain sciences · 2023Article
- The role of endocrine disruptors in female infertility.Molecular biology reports · 2023Review
- New Approach Methodologies for the Endocrine Activity Toolbox: Environmental Assessment for Fish and Amphibians.Environmental toxicology and chemistry · 2023Review
- An extensive review on phenolic compounds and their potential estrogenic properties on skin physiology.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
21 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Endocrine disruption is a specific form of toxicity, where natural and/or anthropogenic chemicals, known as "endocrine disruptors" (EDs), trigger adverse health effects by disrupting the endogenous hormone system. There is need to harmonize guidance on the regulation of EDs, but this has been hampered by what appeared as a lack of consensus among scientists. This publication provides summary information about a consensus reached by a group of world-leading scientists that can serve as the basis for the development of ED criteria in relevant EU legislation. Twenty-three international scientists from different disciplines discussed principles and open questions on ED identification as outlined in a draft consensus paper at an expert meeting hosted by the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR) in Berlin, Germany on 11-12 April 2016. Participants reached a consensus regarding scientific principles for the identification of EDs. The paper discusses the consensus reached on background, definition of an ED and related concepts, sources of uncertainty, scientific principles important for ED identification, and research needs. It highlights the difficulty in retrospectively reconstructing ED exposure, insufficient range of validated test systems for EDs, and some issues impacting on the evaluation of the risk from EDs, such as non-monotonic dose-response and thresholds, modes of action, and exposure assessment. This report provides the consensus statement on EDs agreed among all participating scientists. The meeting facilitated a productive debate and reduced a number of differences in views. It is expected that the consensus reached will serve as an important basis for the development of regulatory ED criteria.
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.