Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37117676›Full record

ReviewNature food2021

A prospective whole-mixture approach to assess risk of the food and chemical exposome.

T Tralau, M Oelgeschläger, J Kugler, D Bloch, A Braeuning, T Burgdorf, P Marx-Stoelting, V Ritz, S Schmeisser, A Trubiroha and 5 more

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature food, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing 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

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Pyriproxyfen, villain or good guy? A brief review.Archives of endocrinology and metabolism · 2024
    Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Mixture Risk Assessment of Complex Real-Life Mixtures-The PANORAMIX Project.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

15 authors.

T TralauGerman Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Berlin, Germany. Tewes.Tralau@bfr.bund.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7857-4237
M OelgeschlägerGerman Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Berlin, Germany. Michael.Oelgeschlaeger@bfr.bund.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5787-5540
J KuglerGerman Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Berlin, Germany. Josephine.Kugler@bfr.bund.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9138-7551
D BlochGerman Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Berlin, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1222-9668
A BraeuningGerman Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Berlin, Germany.
T BurgdorfGerman Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Berlin, Germany.
P Marx-StoeltingGerman Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Berlin, Germany.
V RitzGerman Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Berlin, Germany.
S SchmeisserGerman Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Berlin, Germany.
A TrubirohaGerman Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Berlin, Germany.
S ZellmerGerman Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Berlin, Germany.
A LuchGerman Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Berlin, Germany.
G SchönfelderGerman Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Berlin, Germany.
R SoleckiGerman Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Berlin, Germany.
A HenselGerman Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Berlin, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Many widely used chemicals result in ubiquitous human exposure from multiple sources, including diet. Legislation mainly deals with the toxicological evaluation of single substances owing to a methodological and conceptual lack of alternatives, and does so within defined silos subject to over 40 distinct regulations in the EU alone. Furthermore, much of the research and many of the initiatives concerned with the assessment and evaluation of chemical mixtures and their potential effects on human health rely on retrospective analysis. Here we propose an approach for the prospective identification, assessment and regulation of mixtures relevant to human health. We address two distinct aspects of toxicology-which chemicals actually do occur together, and how potential mixture-related health hazards can be predicted-with an adapted concept of the exposome and large-scale hazard screens. The proactive use of the likelihood of co-exposure, together with the new approach of methods-based testing, may be a timely and feasible way of identifying those substances and mixtures where hazards may have been overlooked and regulatory action is needed. Ideally, we would generate co-exposure patterns for specific consumer groups, depending on lifestyle and dietary habits, to assess the specific risk of identified mixtures.

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.