Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30110518›Full record

ArticleRisk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis2019

Why Do Countries Regulate Environmental Health Risks Differently? A Theoretical Perspective.

Sander C S Clahsen, Irene van Kamp, Betty C Hakkert, Theo G Vermeire, Aldert H Piersma, Erik Lebret

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Sander C S ClahsenCentre for Sustainability, Environment and Health, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment-RIVM, Bilthoven, The Netherlands.
Irene van KampCentre for Sustainability, Environment and Health, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment-RIVM, Bilthoven, The Netherlands.
Betty C HakkertCentre for Safety of Substances and Products, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment-RIVM, Bilthoven, The Netherlands.
Theo G VermeireCentre for Safety of Substances and Products, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment-RIVM, Bilthoven, The Netherlands.
Aldert H PiersmaInstitute for Risk Assessment Sciences, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Erik LebretInstitute for Risk Assessment Sciences, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.

Funding

Rijksinstituut voor Volksgezondheid en Milieu S/124002
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Why do countries regulate, or prefer to regulate, environmental health risks such as radiofrequency electromagnetic fields and endocrine disruptors differently? A wide variety of theories, models, and frameworks can be used to help answer this question, though the resulting answer will strongly depend on the theoretical perspective that is applied. In this theoretical review, we will explore eight conceptual frameworks, from different areas of science, which will offer eight different potential explanations as to why international differences occur in environmental health risk management. We are particularly interested in frameworks that could shed light on the role of scientific expertise within risk management processes. The frameworks included in this review are the Risk Assessment Paradigm, research into the roles of experts as policy advisors, the Psychometric Paradigm, the Cultural Theory of Risk, participatory approaches to risk assessment and risk management, the Advocacy Coalition Framework, the Social Amplification of Risk Framework, and Hofstede's Model of National Cultures. We drew from our knowledge and experiences regarding a diverse set of academic disciplines to pragmatically assemble a multidisciplinary set of frameworks. From the ideas and concepts offered by the eight frameworks, we derive pertinent questions to be used in further empirical work and we present an overarching framework to depict the various links that could be drawn between the frameworks.

Indexed as

Public PolicyCultural CharacteristicsElectromagnetic FieldsEndocrine DisruptorsEnvironmental HealthEnvironmental MonitoringHealth PolicyHumansInternationalityModels, TheoreticalPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsRisk AssessmentRisk ManagementEndocrine DisruptorsInternational differences in environmental health risk managementreview of conceptual frameworksscience-policy interface

Identifiers

PMID30110518
PMCPMC7379724

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.