Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32625798›Full record

ArticleEFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority2018

Scientific Opinion on the state of the science on pesticide risk assessment for amphibians and reptiles.

EFSA Panel on Plant Protection Products and their Residues (PPR), Colin Ockleford, Paulien Adriaanse, Philippe Berny, Theodorus Brock, Sabine Duquesne, Sandro Grilli, Antonio F Hernandez-Jerez, Susanne Hougaard Bennekou, Michael Klein and 17 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing 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

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Impacts of Plant Protection Products on Biodiversity: Limits of Risk Assessment and Avenues to Ground Liability.Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis · 2025
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Estimating dermal contact soil exposure for amphibians.Integrated environmental assessment and management · 2023
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Guidance for Developing Amphibian Population Models for Ecological Risk Assessment.Integrated environmental assessment and management · 2020
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

27 authors.

EFSA Panel on Plant Protection Products and their Residues (PPR)
Colin Ockleford
Paulien Adriaanse
Philippe Berny
Theodorus Brock
Sabine Duquesne
Sandro Grilli
Antonio F Hernandez-Jerez
Susanne Hougaard Bennekou
Michael Klein
Thomas Kuhl
Ryszard Laskowski
Kyriaki Machera
Olavi Pelkonen
Silvia Pieper
Michael Stemmer
Ingvar Sundh
Ivana Teodorovic
Aaldrik Tiktak
Chris J Topping
Gerrit Wolterink
Annette Aldrich
Cecilia Berg
Manuel Ortiz-Santaliestra
Scott Weir
Franz Streissl
Robert H Smith

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Following a request from EFSA, the Panel on Plant Protection Products and their Residues developed an opinion on the science to support the potential development of a risk assessment scheme of plant protection products for amphibians and reptiles. The coverage of the risk to amphibians and reptiles by current risk assessments for other vertebrate groups was investigated. Available test methods and exposure models were reviewed with regard to their applicability to amphibians and reptiles. Proposals were made for specific protection goals aiming to protect important ecosystem services and taking into consideration the regulatory framework and existing protection goals for other vertebrates. Uncertainties, knowledge gaps and research needs were highlighted.

Indexed as

amphibianseffectspesticidespopulationprotection goalsreptilesrisk assessment

Identifiers

PMID32625798
PMCPMC7009658

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-ND
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.