Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32966629›Full record

ReviewRisk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis2021

Recent Advances in Probabilistic Dose-Response Assessment to Inform Risk-Based Decision Making.

Weihsueh A Chiu, Greg M Paoli

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 29% of its field
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Comparative review of human health reference values of the United States.Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology · 2025
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Incorporating new approach methods (NAMs) data in dose-response assessments: The future is now!Journal of toxicology and environmental health. Part B, Critical reviews · 2025
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Weihsueh A ChiuTexas A&M University, College Station, TX, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7575-2368
Greg M PaoliRisk Sciences International, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Nutrition International · CATexas A&M University · US

Funding

Single cell, multi-parametric high throughput platform to classify endocrine disruptor potential of mixturesP42ES027704 · NIEHS · TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY · PI Weihsueh A Chiu · 2017 to 2026
$21.2M
NIEHS NIH HHS P42 ES027704
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Paradoxically, risk assessments for the majority of chemicals lack any quantitative characterization as to the likelihood, incidence, or severity of the risks involved. The relatively few cases where "risk" is truly quantified are based on either epidemiologic data or extrapolation of experimental animal cancer bioassay data. The paucity of chemicals and health endpoints for which such data are available severely limits the ability of decisionmakers to account for the impacts of chemical exposures on human health. The development by the World Health Organization International Programme on Chemical Safety (WHO/IPCS) in 2014 of a comprehensive framework for probabilistic dose-response assessment has opened the door to a myriad of potential advances to better support decision making. Building on the pioneering work of Evans, Hattis, and Slob from the 1990s, the WHO/IPCS framework provides both a firm conceptual foundation as well as practical implementation tools to simultaneously assess uncertainty, variability, and severity of effect as a function of exposure. Moreover, such approaches do not depend on the availability of epidemiologic data, nor are they limited to cancer endpoints. Recent work has demonstrated the broad feasibility of such approaches in order to estimate the functional relationship between exposure level and the incidence or severity of health effects. While challenges remain, such as better characterization of the relationship between endpoints observed in experimental animal or in vitro studies and human health effects, the WHO/IPCS framework provides a strong basis for expanding the breadth of risk management decision contexts supported by chemical risk assessment.

Indexed as

Decision MakingDose-Response Relationship, DrugAnimalsBayes TheoremHumansPatient SafetyProbabilityPublic HealthRisk AssessmentRisk ManagementUncertaintyWorld Health Organizationbenefit-cost analysisdose-response assessmentprobabilistic methods

Identifiers

PMID32966629
PMCPMC8310576
OpenAlexW3089284092

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.