ArticleEFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority2020
Draft for internal testing Scientific Committee guidance on appraising and integrating evidence from epidemiological studies for use in EFSA's scientific assessments.
Article in EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed.
- Guidance for establishing and applying tolerable upper intake levels for vitamins and essential minerals.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2024Article
- Scientific opinion on the tolerable upper intake level for vitamin E.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2024Article
- Scientific Committee guidance on appraising and integrating evidence from epidemiological studies for use in EFSA's scientific assessments.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2024Article
- Scientific opinion on the tolerable upper intake level for iron.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2024Article
- Scientific opinion on the tolerable upper intake level for preformed vitamin A and β-carotene.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2024Article
- The Need for an Alternative Health Claim Process for Foods Based on Both Nutrient and Contaminant Profiles.Current developments in nutrition · 2024Article
- Update of the risk assessment of inorganic arsenic in food.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2024Article
- Scientific opinion on the tolerable upper intake level for manganese.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2023Article
- Scientific opinion on the tolerable upper intake level for folate.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2023Article
- Scientific opinion on the tolerable upper intake level for vitamin D, including the derivation of a conversion factor for calcidiol monohydrate.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2023Article
- Scientific opinion on the tolerable upper intake level for vitamin B6.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2023Article
- Scientific opinion on the tolerable upper intake level for selenium.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2023Article
- Guidance for establishing and applying tolerable upper intake levels for vitamins and essential minerals: Draft for internal testing.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2022Article
- External Validation of LCR1-LCR2, a Multivariable Hepatocellular Carcinoma Risk Calculator, in a Multiethnic Cohort of Patients With Chronic Hepatitis B.Gastro hep advances · 2022Article
- External validation of LCR1-LCR2, a multivariable HCC risk calculator, in patients with chronic HCV.JHEP reports : innovation in hepatology · 2021Article
- Draft for internal testing Scientific Committee guidance on appraising and integrating evidence from epidemiological studies for use in EFSA's scientific assessments.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2020Article
- Scientific Opinion on the state of the science on pesticide risk assessment for amphibians and reptiles.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
25 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
EFSA requested its Scientific Committee to prepare a guidance document on appraising and integrating evidence from epidemiological studies for use in EFSA's scientific assessments. The guidance document provides an introduction to epidemiological studies and illustrates the typical biases of the different epidemiological study designs. It describes key epidemiological concepts relevant for evidence appraisal. Regarding study reliability, measures of association, exposure assessment, statistical inferences, systematic error and effect modification are explained. Regarding study relevance, the guidance describes the concept of external validity. The principles of appraising epidemiological studies are illustrated, and an overview of Risk of Bias (RoB) tools is given. A decision tree is developed to assist in the selection of the appropriate Risk of Bias tool, depending on study question, population and design. The customisation of the study appraisal process is explained, detailing the use of RoB tools and assessing the risk of bias in the body of evidence. Several examples of appraising experimental and observational studies using a Risk of Bias tool are annexed to the document to illustrate the application of the approach. This document constitutes a draft that will be applied in EFSA's assessments during a 1-year pilot phase and be revised and complemented as necessary. Before finalisation of the document, a public consultation will be launched.
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.