ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2018
Policy-Led Comparative Environmental Risk Assessment of Genetically Modified Crops: Testing for Increased Risk Rather Than Profiling Phenotypes Leads to Predictable and Transparent Decision-Making.
Article in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 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
18 citing papers in PubMed.
- Complexity Meets Risk-The Next Generation of Genome-Edited Plants Challenges Established Concepts for Environmental Risk Assessment in the EU.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Modernizing and harmonizing regulatory data requirements for genetically modified crops-perspectives from a workshop.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024Review
- Larval mosquito management and risk to aquatic ecosystems: A comparative approach including current tactics and gene-drive Anopheles techniques.Transgenic research · 2022Article
- Improving the politics of biotechnological innovations in food security and other sustainable development goals.Transgenic research · 2021Article
- Molecular characterization for food safety assessment of a genetically modified late blight resistant potato: an unusual case.Transgenic research · 2021Article
- Article
- Transparency in risk-disproportionate regulation of modern crop-breeding techniques.GM crops & food · 2021Article
- New Frontiers in Biosafety and Biosecurity.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2021Article
- Adequacy and sufficiency evaluation of existing EFSA guidelines for the molecular characterisation, environmental risk assessment and post-market environmental monitoring of genetically modified insects containing engineered gene drives.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2020Article
- Plant breeding involving genetic engineering does not result in unacceptable unintended effects in rice relative to conventional cross-breeding.The Plant journal : for cell and molecular biology · 2020Article
- Consideration of familiarity accumulated in the confined field trials for environmental risk assessment of genetically modified soybean (Glycine max) in Japan.Transgenic research · 2020Article
- New Hope for a "Cursed" Crop? Understanding Stakeholder Attitudes to Plant Molecular Farming With Modified Tobacco in Europe.Frontiers in plant science · 2020Article
- Problem Formulation for Off-Target Effects of Externally Applied Double-Stranded RNA-Based Products for Pest Control.Frontiers in plant science · 2020Article
- Problem formulation and phenotypic characterisation for the development of novel crops.Transgenic research · 2019Article
- Using problem formulation for fit-for-purpose pre-market environmental risk assessments of regulated stressors.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2019Article
- Conducting fit-for-purpose food safety risk assessments.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2019Article
- Using problem formulation to clarify the meaning of weight of evidence and biological relevance in environmental risk assessments for genetically modified crops.GM crops & food · 2019Article
- Familiarity in the Context of Risk Assessment of Transgenic Crops: Focus on Some Countries in the Americas.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2019Article
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
We describe two contrasting methods of comparative environmental risk assessment for genetically modified (GM) crops. Both are science-based, in the sense that they use science to help make decisions, but they differ in the relationship between science and policy. Policy-led comparative risk assessment begins by defining what would be regarded as unacceptable changes when the use a particular GM crop replaces an accepted use of another crop. Hypotheses that these changes will not occur are tested using existing or new data, and corroboration or falsification of the hypotheses is used to inform decision-making. Science-led comparative risk assessment, on the other hand, tends to test null hypotheses of no difference between a GM crop and a comparator. The variables that are compared may have little or no relevance to any previously stated policy objective and hence decision-making tends to be
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.